User Tag List

First 56789 Last

Results 61 to 70 of 100

  1. #61
    philosopher wood nymph greenfairy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    MBTI
    iNfj
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    4,042

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Great One View Post
    Yes, I have always preferred the "hands on" method of learning as well. I personally hate the classic way of learning that is taught in school, which is basically, "Read, memorize, and then recite. Then rinse and repeat". My method of preferred learning is to discuss things with another person and bounce ideas off of each other. My method of learning is much more interactive. When I try to read a book, I almost never finish the damn thing because I will read a little bit of it, and then my mind will just space out into the crab nebula or worse: I will get a book and then it will give me a new idea to read a new book and then I will abandon the current book for a new one. It's so fucking hard for me to finish things!
    This is absolutely true for me too (as I am an ambivert)! But I can do pretty well reading, then talking to a person knowledgeable in the area who can thoroughly explain the concepts to me, then incorporating the concepts and applying them.
    Quote Originally Posted by The Great One View Post
    However, you say that you hate to do research, but then if you hate doing this, then how do you gather information? I mean, obviously you aren't going to go out and rediscover everything right? For example, if you won $2,000,000 today in the lottery and decided that you now want to learn about the stock market and learn to invest this money in hopes that you will grow your money how would you do this? Would you go to professionals in the industry and have them show you everything they know? Would you go to seminars? Would you just start reading a book on investing and then just do a trial and error method of investing to see what works and what doesn't? I'm really trying to understand the Ti process more vividly here.
    I would do all of these. But I would use an interactive process of discussing my potential choices with others, and getting affirmation that they were good.

  2. #62
    Alexander the Terrible yenom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    1,755

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wildcat View Post
    Ti does not want to solve problems. Te does.
    Te: goals, results, getting things done. Again nothing to do with problem solving and intelligence in general. To solve problems involve critical thinking and understanding, Te thinks that its a waste of time. Anytime Te user hits a problem or obstacle or brick wall, you get a temper tantrum, which is very fun to watch.

    Te: What needs to be done?
    Form a plan
    Get it done.

    Whatever gets the workaholic machine going is Te.

    goal--> plan--> work--> goal--> plan--> work
    Last edited by yenom; 03-10-2013 at 08:01 AM.
    The fear of poverty turns people into slaves of money.

    "In this Caesar there are many Mariuses"~Sulla

    Conquer your inner demons first before you conquer the world.

  3. #63
    Senior Member Doctorjuice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    177

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Great One View Post
    Do you still disagree with it though?
    Yeah, I think so. I mean, Ti may fail and it will try again, but I'm not going to count that as trial and error. I think the process of trial and error you are talking about is due to two functions. Experimentation to gain data, this is Pe, either Se or Ne. Then, if the person is using Ti, they will organize this perception according to logical principles, according to a framework, according to what seems accurate to them, etc. These judgment processes can take place either during the moment or after the fact. They may even, to an extent, take place beforehand.

  4. #64
    meh Salomé's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    10,540

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Doctorjuice View Post
    Induction corresponds with empirical reasoning. Thus, induction corresponds with Te.

    Deduction follows strict reasoning and logic. Ti corresponds with applying logical principles. Thus, deduction corresponds with Ti.

    Seems pretty simple to me.
    Maybe too simple... I don't think the correspondences are quite that neat.

    As an outwardly directed function interested in real world results, Extroverted Thinking is going to have a greater affinity for whatever is tried and true, explicit and measurable, but that doesn't rule out the use of deductive reasoning. In fact deductive reasoning appeals to the linear nature of Te.

    Both forms of reasoning are employed by Ti, (often in a circle) though the process is usually less explicit and formal.

    Lenore Thomson offers the following example of problem-solving using Te vs Ti: packing a bag of groceries. Te, she says, would require the use of a ruler, calculating the volume of the container and that of each item purchased, and then calculating the optimal arrangement of those items in the container. (This is actually a kind of deductive reasoning, no?)
    Whereas Ti allows us to approximate the best spatial arrangement without explicit calculation or any application of formal logic (presumably based on experience which allows us to build mental models of the way the world works).
    Another example is parallel parking. When I learned to drive, my instructor had bits of black sticky tape on the back window, and reverse parking was an exercise in lining up various markers. Of course, this only enables the trainee to park that particular car - put them in another car and those methods are useless. I find learning anything using shortcuts like those singularly frustrating. In order to do anything, I need to grasp the principles - the things that are unchanging and applicable to every situation, and then tailor my approach to specific circumstances.

    Quote Originally Posted by KDude View Post
    Like I said. Go outside. Do you have any ESTP or ISTP friends? Are they really getting all egghead-ish and recalling models and systems before they hop into something? At least in my case, life has been more of an experiment. And I can't recall very many things where I explicitly calculated and abstracted a situation before getting involved. I didn't think of the correct parameters and form before jumping on a skateboard for the first time. Or if I saw a cute girl at a party, I didn't use a deductive process in approaching her, like some PUA dork. I just got involved with the situation.. this is Se.
    I think ISTPs respond to the "logic" of a situation in a way that is similar but more instinctive than is the case for INTPs, who are always somewhat removed, detached, analytical and thus more conscious of the model-building process.

    Ti is deductive in the sense that is concerned with structural possibilities. Its understanding of the world is built up from first principles. If x, then y. If x and y, then z, etc, etc. This is a mathematical kind of reasoning, but it is also apparent in sports, which use an intuitive (in the sense of instinctive) grasp of physics to, in the case of a tennis or snooker player, say, strike a ball in exactly the right way to achieve a desired result. Numerous lightning-fast calculations must be performed in order to do this, though the player is only conscious of his ability to "read" the situation and respond appropriately. "Reading" relies on Se, in this context, but the response part of the equation is (arguably) Ti. This kind of activity necessitates the construction of a mental map which models the physical parameters of the situation. "Inductive logic" is not going to help the player respond creatively and flexibly - because it will limit him to responding in ways that he has done before. In a "flow" state, he is able to anticipate and respond creatively, because his mental model of the structural possibilities is complete. His body knows "if I do this, that will happen", not because he has practiced that particular move over and over and over (no move is repeated exactly the same way twice) but because he has a deep, practical understanding of the physics at play (even if he could never put into words or formulate equations of what he knows). We all employ Ti in this reflexive way, in the sense of "folk physics". In this sense, it is not a strictly experimental approach (what happens if I do x?) it is more informed than that, but the "information" informs the whole body, instructs the fluidity of movement. However, in the early stages of learning anything, a more experimental approach is going to be called for, since we can only construct our mental models, ultimately, based on observation and experience, especially when we are talking about the kinds of behaviours that become reflexive.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivy View Post
    Gosh, the world looks so small from up here on my high horse of menstruation.

  5. #65
    Senior Member Doctorjuice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    177

    Default

    @Salomé

    First off, let me just say that, as far as I can tell, I don't really disagree with anything you say in your last post and I like your illustrations of Ti. Now that that has been said:

    So: Both functions involve themselves in both types of reasoning (deductive and inductive) at least some of the time. Do we agree on this?

    Next:
    Extroverted Thinking is going to have a greater affinity for whatever is tried and true, explicit and measurable, but that doesn't rule out the use of deductive reasoning. In fact deductive reasoning appeals to the linear nature of Te.
    So, Te is going to have a greater affinity for empirical reasoning than Ti, which doesn't have such a great affinity for what is bolded. Do we agree on this?

    At the same time, deductive reasoning is something that Te can put great faith in (if the reasoning is sound, if they understand it, etc.). Do we agree on this?

    However, in the early stages of learning anything, a more experimental approach is going to be called for, since we can only construct our mental models, ultimately, based on observation and experience, especially when we are talking about the kinds of behaviours that become reflexive.
    I argue, in the case of Ti-doms, that the process you describe in quotations is mostly use of Pe, and Ti, at most, to a small extent.

    Ti is deductive in the sense that is concerned with structural possibilities. Its understanding of the world is built up from first principles.
    I argue that Ti lends itself to deductive reasoning over empirical reasoning, and I think the part that I bolded here is very much related to that argument.

    I also believe that Te has a greater affinity for empirical reasoning than deductive reasoning: Te has an affinity for objective data. Empirical reasoning is usually more involved with objective data than deductive reasoning, no? Thus, my conclusion follows.

    It must follow from these things that you will generally see, at least to some degree, more use of empirical reasoning involved with Te than Ti, and more use of deductive reasoning involved with Ti than Te. Do we agree on this?

    If so, how large of a degree/difference is this? Is it not very influential or is it significant?

    I predict that if you put an INTP and ENTJ side by side, and give an argument based on empirical reasoning, the ENTJ will be more likely to be swayed by it. If the argument is based on deductive reasoning, the INTP will be more likely to be swayed by it (though to a smaller degree than the previous case, I think).

  6. #66
    Honor Thy Inferior Such Irony's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    INtp
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/so
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    5,091

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Salomé View Post
    Maybe too simple... I don't think the correspondences are quite that neat.

    As an outwardly directed function interested in real world results, Extroverted Thinking is going to have a greater affinity for whatever is tried and true, explicit and measurable, but that doesn't rule out the use of deductive reasoning. In fact deductive reasoning appeals to the linear nature of Te.

    Both forms of reasoning are employed by Ti, (often in a circle) though the process is usually less explicit and formal.

    Lenore Thomson offers the following example of problem-solving using Te vs Ti: packing a bag of groceries. Te, she says, would require the use of a ruler, calculating the volume of the container and that of each item purchased, and then calculating the optimal arrangement of those items in the container. (This is actually a kind of deductive reasoning, no?)
    Whereas Ti allows us to approximate the best spatial arrangement without explicit calculation or any application of formal logic (presumably based on experience which allows us to build mental models of the way the world works).
    Another example is parallel parking. When I learned to drive, my instructor had bits of black sticky tape on the back window, and reverse parking was an exercise in lining up various markers. Of course, this only enables the trainee to park that particular car - put them in another car and those methods are useless. I find learning anything using shortcuts like those singularly frustrating. In order to do anything, I need to grasp the principles - the things that are unchanging and applicable to every situation, and then tailor my approach to specific circumstances.
    Good examples. I know that I would find the Te approach to packing a bag incredibly tedious and am far more inclined to the Ti approach. With parallel parking, I kind of intuitively know that what works with one car may not work with another car. I know the principle behind it but I suck in the execution of it. Maybe that's weak sensing. I'd rather just avoid parallel parking altogether even if it means more time spent looking for a spot or parking farther away.

    I particularly agree with the bolded statement. That is like the story of my life.
    INtp
    5w6 or 9w1 sp/so/sx, I think
    Ravenclaw/Hufflepuff
    Neutral Good
    LII-Ne




  7. #67
    Senior Member KDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    8,263

    Default

    Yeah, I remember reading that in Thomson's book. It might be extreme, but I've seen the same process in other activities. Like an ESTJ friend setting up a garden. He measured everything out on paper, set up areas for certain kinds of plants, etc..

  8. #68
    Senior Member The Great One's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    6w7
    Posts
    3,461

    Default

    @greenfairy

    This is absolutely true for me too (as I am an ambivert)! But I can do pretty well reading, then talking to a person knowledgeable in the area who can thoroughly explain the concepts to me, then incorporating the concepts and applying them.
    I can do well reading, but I prefer to read articles than books. The longer the literature for me, the larger the chance that I'm going to become distracted, and move on to something else. I also agree with consulting knowledgeable people in the field and bouncing ideas off of one another. lol, all along I was under the assumption that this was purely a Te thing.

  9. #69
    Senior Member The Great One's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    6w7
    Posts
    3,461

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Doctorjuice View Post
    Yeah, I think so. I mean, Ti may fail and it will try again, but I'm not going to count that as trial and error. I think the process of trial and error you are talking about is due to two functions. Experimentation to gain data, this is Pe, either Se or Ne. Then, if the person is using Ti, they will organize this perception according to logical principles, according to a framework, according to what seems accurate to them, etc. These judgment processes can take place either during the moment or after the fact. They may even, to an extent, take place beforehand.
    I think that I do this, but I'd have to think about for a while.

  10. #70
    philosopher wood nymph greenfairy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    MBTI
    iNfj
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    4,042

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Great One View Post
    I also agree with consulting knowledgeable people in the field and bouncing ideas off of one another. lol, all along I was under the assumption that this was purely a Te thing.
    I don't think so, because Ti users use Ne if they are NT. Ne needs information, and other people's opinions are just viewed as information to be mentally digested and then assimilated. Ne is more interactive than Se. Se is like physical interaction and Ne is mental interaction. So NT's need to bounce ideas off other people to some extent. The really introverted INTP's would probably do more preliminary Ti work, and then read about what they agree with along with conflicting views in order to sort out what makes sense within their framework (and adjust their framework to reality), but ENTP's are much more reliant on outside thought in order to form their own.

    Te using NT's evaluate mental concepts and create a system using Ni; so they use Te for informational purposes as static information rather than dynamic. Other people's knowledge and opinions are viewed as fact or fiction, true or false, and then their personal integration uses intuition. That's why Te dom/aux trusts "authoritative" sources, because they aren't in the business of judging credibility on the basis of evaluation of ideas alone. They'd prefer that to be done for them, so then they can have a trusted source of information to evaluate with Ni.

    @Salomé, would you say then that Ti is conducive to thinking in pictures? I can clearly see the connection with spacial relations if INTP is the architect archetype, and deduction/Ti does imply a kind of structure; but I was associating a "thinking in pictures" quality more with Ni. I'm sure they both do this to an extent, but what would you say is the distinction?
    Quote Originally Posted by Salomé View Post
    Ti is deductive in the sense that is concerned with structural possibilities. Its understanding of the world is built up from first principles. If x, then y. If x and y, then z, etc, etc. This is a mathematical kind of reasoning, but it is also apparent in sports, which use an intuitive (in the sense of instinctive) grasp of physics to, in the case of a tennis or snooker player, say, strike a ball in exactly the right way to achieve a desired result. Numerous lightning-fast calculations must be performed in order to do this, though the player is only conscious of his ability to "read" the situation and respond appropriately. "Reading" relies on Se, in this context, but the response part of the equation is (arguably) Ti. This kind of activity necessitates the construction of a mental map which models the physical parameters of the situation. "Inductive logic" is not going to help the player respond creatively and flexibly - because it will limit him to responding in ways that he has done before. In a "flow" state, he is able to anticipate and respond creatively, because his mental model of the structural possibilities is complete. His body knows "if I do this, that will happen", not because he has practiced that particular move over and over and over (no move is repeated exactly the same way twice) but because he has a deep, practical understanding of the physics at play (even if he could never put into words or formulate equations of what he knows). We all employ Ti in this reflexive way, in the sense of "folk physics". In this sense, it is not a strictly experimental approach (what happens if I do x?) it is more informed than that, but the "information" informs the whole body, instructs the fluidity of movement. However, in the early stages of learning anything, a more experimental approach is going to be called for, since we can only construct our mental models, ultimately, based on observation and experience, especially when we are talking about the kinds of behaviours that become reflexive.
    I think this paragraph is spot on; but what then would you say about people for whom Ti is not in their top four functions? What processes would be responsible for this, or alternatively, how would Ti integrate itself into the top functions? Might say an ESFP use Ni in a similar way, or use Ni to communicate Ti to the conscious functions? Or maybe Te would work with Ti somehow, as you mention the two sharing actions in some ways.

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