User Tag List

First 23456 Last

Results 31 to 40 of 100

  1. #31
    Filthy Apes! Kalach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    4,318

    Default

    Beuaty take time.
    Time no want to loos
    Bellison uncorked a flood of horrible profanity, which, translated, meant, "This is extremely unusual."

    Boy meets Grr

  2. #32
    Wake, See, Sing, Dance Cellmold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    5,809

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Salomé View Post
    This is something TJs often cannot understand. They think that everything can be systematised and procedurized and thereby made more efficient and predictable and easy, when in fact, only mindless tasks can. I was once asked (by an ESTJ manager) to document my problem-solving process (so that other people could use it). He saw that I got the best results and wanted to systematise my process. Of course, I could do no such thing. One is either sensitive to the aesthetic potential of a situation, or one is not. I can simply "see" when something is wrong, when the logic is faulty, the impression is as real and immediate as that of other sense data. It is like looking at pink and orange side by side. Things that are wrong offend my aesthetic sensibility. They leap out at me. How does one explain that to the colour-blind? I can laboriously delineate what the problem is so that others can fix it, but I am at a loss to teach them how to "see" what is so obvious and immediate to me. It is only thus because Ti looks deeply into things, until it understands structure and potential, what a system can do, and what it cannot. There is no substitute or shortcut for that.
    This is very true and an unfortunate sadness. It's something I don't possess of course, but therein lies the sadness, it makes understanding look unattainable.

    Obviously no one can truely see the world as another individual, that's what makes them...them, but to at least get some sliver of that perspective, that mindset, that understanding, would be a great goal, at least for me.
    'One of (Lucas) Cranach's masterpieces, discussed by (Joseph) Koerner, is in it's self-referentiality the perfect expression of left-hemisphere emptiness and a precursor of post-modernism. There is no longer anything to point to beyond, nothing Other, so it points pointlessly to itself.' - Iain McGilChrist

    Suppose a tree fell down, Pooh, when we were underneath it?"
    "Suppose it didn't," said Pooh, after careful thought.
    Piglet was comforted by this.
    - A.A. Milne.

  3. #33
    meh Salomé's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    10,540

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kalach View Post
    Beuaty take time.
    Time no want to loos
    Meh. Death is Coming.

    Ti is concerned with the qualitative; Te with the quantitative...?
    If you can't measure it in widgets, it has no value for Te.

    I will say that where Te has the edge is in the narrowing of scope (Ti tends towards a broadening of scope as it seeks perfection through completeness), clarity of purpose, the definition of goals, strategy, and communication of those things. Ti is woolly/indifferent on such matters. Goals cannot properly be formulated until a system is thoroughly understood (although of course, practically, they must be) and are largely imposed by considerations which seem arbitrary rather than necessary. There is a sniffy sort of reluctance to go there. It is uninspiring work, at best; stifling, at worst.
    When I solve a problem, I tend to solve it to my own satisfaction. I am satisfied when a solution coheres and has some kind of integrity. The client's requirements are often secondary. (Usually, they can't be trusted to be authorities on their own needs because they don't know what's possible, so they are arguing from a position of ignorance.) Implementation is secondary. The real can never be as beautiful as the ideal, it will be encumbered with compromise, and therefore loses appeal.
    However, one must learn to communicate in terms of widgets, no matter how sordid that might be. Since widgets make the world go round. (Not really, but we all pretend they do, which is much the same thing).

    It's difficult to overstate how much I loathe the kind of box-checking exercises that TJs glory in. Procedure layered on top of pointless, wasteful procedure. Complication as a means of career-building. Bureaucracy.

    However, unless a Ti-Dom acquires adequate facility with Te, the ability to compromise and negotiate, he will likely be spectacularly unproductive and under-appreciated. Most of us are forced to, through circumstance, and through formal education.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivy View Post
    Gosh, the world looks so small from up here on my high horse of menstruation.

  4. #34
    i love skylights's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 so/sx
    Socionics
    EII Ne
    Posts
    7,835

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KDude View Post
    So now ISTPs can't adjust the air conditioner, without being abstract about it.

    Learn something new everyday.

    There's a big problem when defining functions in isolation. I think functions are like mixing colors. Blue and Yellow make Green. But Blue and Red make Purple.
    Lol, it's funny when I realize how N I am. I thought the way I understood Ti-Se wasn't abstract. Guess it is. Back to the drawing board.

    I'm inclined to agree about "tinted" functions - but even then, what do you see as similarities between INTP and ISTP Ti usage?

  5. #35
    Senior Member The Great One's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    6w7
    Posts
    3,461

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by greenfairy View Post
    I do both of these. It depends on the subject matter. I always incorporate what I think and try to understand how it works. I can't solve anything unless I understand how it works. And if I'm told to do something I'll probably do it in a different way than what the person intended because it makes sense to me.

    Funny, I have the total Ti approach to college papers. Te papers are no fun. I want to come up with an original opinion/theory and fully explain it with irrefutable logic. That's why philosophy is so much fun.

    I do have a holistic approach, as KDude mentioned. I'll use whatever creative method gives insight, and I'm very visual. And lots of N activity.

    I have noticed that Ti is more individual and Te is more collective, as in trusting outside sources. Ti is more independent this way; we want to possess "meta" type knowledge, which we can apply again and again to anything, without having to consult other people. We want to create a blueprint. Te is more group oriented, and uses people and resources in problem solving, while Ti just wants to use theory and materials. Ti has the ideas and Te does the implementation. Te is more results oriented. They don't consider the problem solved until something gets done in the real world. Ti is just like, well this is how you do it. Problem solved.

    Good assessment though. I think you hit on the major distinctions. As both are thinking functions, I think they'll happily work together to solve problems. Thinking after all is composed of both inductive (Te) and deductive (Ti) logic.
    I hate college papers too. One thing that really pisses me off about typing college papers is that I can literally google something and ten different sources will all say the same damn thing. So I then have to look for the "accredited source" that's going to "officially" say the same damn thing. It's a pain in the ass.

    Quote Originally Posted by greenfairy View Post
    I agree, but it depends on how important the theory is, and how interconnected it is to the Ti framework. The bigger a part of it it is, the more sensitive; no one likes thinking that their whole worldview based on logic is completely wrong. However, a detail or two or a misapplication is not a big deal, and an unrelated hare brained idea which turns out to be incorrect or doesn't work is totally fine. Part of the Ti process is finding out what is correct by refining things and eliminating what isn't true, so eliminating what isn't true in our thought system is just part of the process. And no matter how much it hurts our pride, if we find out we are totally wrong and look like an idiot, we will face it and correct the error. (Most of us, anyway. The INTP's who ignore their Ne might just continue to think they are the smartest person in the world and it's everyone else who is wrong.)
    .
    Yeah, I agree with this. The more and more of an understanding that I have come to when it comes to a certain subject, the more aggressively that I will argue that I'm right. It really pisses me off when people say that I'm wrong.

  6. #36
    Senior Member KDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    8,263

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by skylights View Post
    I'm inclined to agree about "tinted" functions - but even then, what do you see as similarities between INTP and ISTP Ti usage?
    That's difficult to answer. I'm not sure if I've met any INTPs up close. ENTPs are more common, I think, but not as easy to compare.

  7. #37
    Senior Member The Great One's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    6w7
    Posts
    3,461

    Default

    More questions:

    1. How do Ti users feel about doing research to solve a problem?

    2. How would Te in the tertiary position solve a problem? Like ENFP's for example.

  8. #38
    Rainy Day Woman MDP2525's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    5,534

    Default

    U
    Quote Originally Posted by LAze0rS View Post
    ....This leads to understanding and problem solving at fast rates, which leads to irritation waiting for others to catch up to pace.


    ALTHOUGH: It's possible when presented with a completely new field, the Ti user is slow in comparison to others. This is because there's no past framework and they're building one. The build process is slow, but once it's finished it can be referenced at very fast speeds.
    Very. Accurate.
    ~luck favors the ready~


    Shameless Self-Promotion:MDP2525's Den and the Start of Motorcycle Maintenance

  9. #39
    Senior Member Doctorjuice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    177

    Default

    @The Great One

    I think your OP was generally on-target. I wasn't sure about equating Ti to a trial-and-error process, I just don't think that's a very significant facet of Ti, if it is a facet at all.

    Te is primarily empirical in its approach to solving problems. Ti applies logical principles and/or a framework to a problem. If the end-result is known, that is good enough for Te. This is far from satisfactory for Ti which needs to understand something's internal structure thoroughly.

    Because of these things I've mentioned, I think it's generally the case that Ti is deductive whereas Te is inductive. There are people who have voiced pretty strong opposition to this and I've never understood why.

    EDIT: I now clearly see how you came up with your trial-and-error explanation. I'm not sure what to say about it.

  10. #40
    Senior Member Doctorjuice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    177

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LAze0rS View Post
    DoctorJuice I know you're in this thread!

    I'd love to hear your response (and critique ofc) to my perception of Ti (yes I'm demanding), as I respect your videos and insight.
    You've got to put the @ symbol in front of my name so I receive a notification about it. I just happened to see your post by chance! haha. And you're banned now, so I'm not sure how much point there is in me responding to this...

    Anyway, I typed out a response already. In reference to your post, it all seems on target to me. I wasn't feeling right about what @The Great One said about trial-and-error and it seems you had the same intuition. Yes, the OP was pretty descriptive, in other words they were talking a good deal about how the functions appear externally, which is less ideal than talking about how they actually work, imo.

    A bit more detail on Te: It replicates the external world and uses these replications as criteria for judgment. So, it is pretty easy for a TJ to know when something is meeting these criteria, it just needs to mirror the replication. Take Ti-doms in contrast, it's harder for something to pass their standards of judgment. They need to thoroughly understand the correct framework to be applied and make sure the judgment is in coherence with all those logical principles, no contradictions are being made, and probably other things as well.

    Te is simpler in this way, overlooks things Ti wouldn't. Jung calls it "sterilizing." But it is more practical and efficient and can be more easily understood. Plus other people can follow in the footsteps of the Te judgments pretty easily.

Similar Threads

  1. [JCF] Ti/Fe vs Fi/Te (ENTP/ENFP)
    By MadTeaParty in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-24-2016, 05:53 AM
  2. Ti and Te arguing: The film critic vs. the lawyer
    By The Great One in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 89
    Last Post: 08-24-2013, 06:22 PM
  3. Romney vs. Obama; Te(Fi) vs. Ti(Fe)
    By Istbkleta in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 09-21-2012, 05:12 PM
  4. The Euthyphro -- Ti vs. Te?
    By Athenian200 in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-08-2011, 08:19 PM
  5. [JCF] How my Ti functions (crude representation) vs. F in an "argument"
    By MacGuffin in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 09-20-2007, 06:13 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO