User Tag List

123 Last

Results 1 to 10 of 100

  1. #1
    Senior Member The Great One's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    6w7
    Posts
    3,461

    Default The Ti problem solving process vs. the Te problem solving process.

    So I've been looking everywhere for answers on this question that I have, but no one can answer this question so far. My question is this: What is the main difference between the Ti problem solving process and the Te problem solving process? So far I have come up with this:

    With the Ti problem solving process, the individual in question solves a problem in their own head. They first identify the problem and understand it fully. Then they come up with a solution by themselves, without really consulting external forces. The Ti method of solving a problem seems to be trial and error, trial and error. The Ti user first comes up with a possible solution that will work to solve a problem then tries it, and if it doesn't work, they try something else. When I think of the Ti problem solving process I think of Thomas Edison's invention of the light bulb: He had many different solutions in mind to possibly solve his problem and kept trying thing after thing until it worked. Ti seems to have the tinker toy methodology to solving problems. Ti seems to only consult external resources when it gets stuck, and can't figure something out. It should also be noted that it is much more important for the Ti user to understand the full nature of their problem solving process and the problem at hand. You can't just give a Ti user a task and tell them to do it, because the common response you will get out of them is, "Why am I doing this?" and "How does it work"? This often angers Te users because they will say to themselves, "Who cares how it works, just do it! This is wasting time having to explain it to you", and this in turn often angers Ti users.

    The Te problem solving process seems to be more external. When the Te user is trying to solve a problem, they look to the external world. In order to solve a problem the Te user, will often consult an expert in the field of the problem that he is trying to solve: the Te user will go to known authorities on a subject. In addition, the Te user will conduct research and look at external facts from things such as books by accredited authors. When I think of the Te method to solving a problem I often think of writing a college paper: You do loads of research on a subject, get the facts, organize the data, and state the "credible" external sources where you got the information. Boom! Problem solved.

    Would you folks agree with this, and/or would you like to add more to this post?

  2. #2
    Senior Member KDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    8,263

    Default

    I think I look at things holistically... But maybe not quite in the same way one would associate with Ne (or maybe I do). If I was asked to assemble a piece of store bought furniture, I'd be better off seeing a picture of the completed project, and going from there. I'd also conduct trial and error as well, like you do.. sort of experimenting and looking at how the pieces work in my hands. All the steps would "click" easier from that standpoint. Te would take a more step by step approach and follow the instructions more carefully. I think both an ESTJ and ISTP at least could step into each other's shoes and do things the other way, but each is going to have a preference.

  3. #3
    subterfugee Xann's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Posts
    1,747

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Great One View Post
    So I've been looking everywhere for answers on this question that I have, but no one can answer this question so far. My question is this: What is the main difference between the Ti problem solving process and the Te problem solving process?
    Perhaps no one has been willing to go into the required depth of analysis to be able to answer this question to you personally satisfactorily, but the answers are quite blatantly visible upon consulting source works on function theory. (Heh, this is quite obviously a case of your Ti seeking clarification via an Fe/Ne source imo, while I personally being a Te user (inferior however) would simply create my own hypothesis based upon externally valid sources of information. It is not like this question has never been posed before in an observable location, but I do not think you are actually asking the right question, as a function by itself can never purely solve a problem.

    Quote Originally Posted by The Great One View Post
    So far I have come up with this:

    With the Ti problem solving process, the individual in question solves a problem in their own head. They first identify the problem and understand it fully. Then they come up with a solution by themselves, without really consulting external forces. The Ti method of solving a problem seems to be trial and error, trial and error. The Ti user first comes up with a possible solution that will work to solve a problem then tries it, and if it doesn't work, they try something else. When I think of the Ti problem solving process I think of Thomas Edison's invention of the light bulb: He had many different solutions in mind to possibly solve his problem and kept trying thing after thing until it worked. Ti seems to have the tinker toy methodology to solving problems. Ti seems to only consult external resources when it gets stuck, and can't figure something out. It should also be noted that it is much more important for the Ti user to understand the full nature of their problem solving process and the problem at hand. You can't just give a Ti user a task and tell them to do it, because the common response you will get out of them is, "Why am I doing this?" and "How does it work"? This often angers Te users because they will say to themselves, "Who cares how it works, just do it! This is wasting time having to explain it to you", and this in turn often angers Ti users.
    First off, I'd like to make clear that all problems are solved in a person's own head, regardless of their function set up, and while Ti does value internal logical consistency in understanding reality and potential problems therein, it still requires external direction, information, and a reason to do so, which are all supplied by the extraverted functions and senses of said Ti user. You say "They first identify the problem and understand it fully", I would have to say while this is often the case with an ENTP Ti-user who has already scoped out the totality of what they intend to solve internally via Ne foresight, this is not always the case with all usages of Ti, nor any practical problem beyond a theoretically-posed one; while it is the nature of the ENTP mind to perceive potential problems in this manner it is rarely the case in reality. Most usages of Ti when it comes to solving complex and multi-layered problems require constant sculpting with the use of Ne, Se or Fe. Although Ti users do tend to seem to "solve problems by themselves" more often than not when Ti is in the dominant or auxiliary position, the internal forms of understanding of logic, cause-effect, and perceptions of internal and external consistency were already in existence prior to the introduction of said problems due to previous analysis of the sense perceptions via the use of extraverted functions.
    The solution, while seemingly not having been reliant on any external force, is completely defined by the posed problem, which was previously understood in its totality in the case of a Ti user by their Fe function (which contrary to common opinion does not always have to do directly with people, but rather can apply to awareness of a perceived "need" of any kind), as well as the amalgamation of thought stemming from their other functions. No problem is ever perceived or solved through the use of a single function.

    Quote Originally Posted by The Great One View Post
    The Te problem solving process seems to be more external. When the Te user is trying to solve a problem, they look to the external world. In order to solve a problem the Te user, will often consult an expert in the field of the problem that he is trying to solve: the Te user will go to known authorities on a subject. In addition, the Te user will conduct research and look at external facts from things such as books by accredited authors. When I think of the Te method to solving a problem I often think of writing a college paper: You do loads of research on a subject, get the facts, organize the data, and state the "credible" external sources where you got the information. Boom! Problem solved.
    While I agree with this for the most part, I'd just like to state that not all Te users care for things such as accredited authors or citing credible sources, for many Te users who seek to solve problems for their own sake much prefer actual external and internal validity in reality over "credibility", it is just that their route for seeking this starts from the outside rather than the inside, but use of either function (Ti or Te) can result in both external and internal validity to an equal degree given enough understanding and determination when it comes to scoping out reality and solving problems. Keep in mind an introverted Te user will by default be consulting themselves prior to going to search for externally valid sources of information, especially in the case of IxFP types, who have realities strongly filtered by other functions and who place much more value on their understanding of the subjectivity of a potential problem rather than just quickly seeking out external sources to "solve it".

    Quote Originally Posted by Nikola Tesla
    If Edison had a needle to find in a haystack, he would proceed at once with the diligence of the bee to examine straw after straw until he found the object of his search... I was a sorry witness of such doings, knowing that a little theory and calculation would have saved him ninety per cent of his labor.
    In my opinion a healthy usage of both functions is superior to any function by itself.

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

    Default

    People write a lot of shit about functions...

    There is no such thing as a "Ti-user" vs a "Te-user". Anyone can use Ti or Te, depending on what makes sense in a given scenario.

    Ti and Te are not "problem-solving processes". They are methods of decision-making.
    Boiled down, Te is pragmatic; Ti is aesthetic.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivy View Post
    Gosh, the world looks so small from up here on my high horse of menstruation.

  5. #5
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    MBTI
    ESTP
    Enneagram
    8w7
    Posts
    2,319

    Default

    Te uses objective facts and Ti uses subjective facts that the Ti user doesn't consider grounded until they're put into practice and yield predictable results. This is why STP's can be incredibly stubborn in their beliefs and have "theories" as to why something happens the way it does, but they look outlandish to Te users. The STP will come up with a theory, "I believe if I punch jerry in the face he'll cry because he's been thinking a lot about his dead mother lately." So an Se-Ti user punches jerry in the face, jerry cries. "See look, Jerry is thinking about his mother constantly I proved it!" This is one of the flaws with Ti in that if they're not careful it can attribute the wrong information to the actual solution, and the Ti user can become very confident in his reasoning which ultimately doesn't make any sense to anyone else.

    So for you, a Ti user, I would imagine you have an experimental approach, most likely trial and error so long as everything makes sense in your mind. Your create the theory in your mind, and then you implement it to see if its practical in real life. This is why TJ's are often very afraid of looking wrong while TP's could care less. If a TJ is wrong, it basically means all of their sources are wrong and their life is in shambles... Sucks. Ti users will often just drop the theory and come up with something new and not take it personally.

    If you're a Te user, your decision would be based on things that you KNOW for a fact work.
    ENTJ: "We're gonna go get some girls tonight at the club. Wear a suit, shave, cut your hair, put on deodorant, and don't act like an idiot."
    ENTP: "Hey wanna TRY picking up some girls tonight? I made a machine that shoots lasers everywhere at the club, its gonna be awesome. I wonder if it'll attract anybody."

    More specifically, Ti is ANALOGICAL while Te is LOGICAL. It is universally understood by Te users that 1+1=2, and that if you plug these numbers into a calculator and follow math equations they will yield logical results.

    However, Ti focus's more on analogical data. This is why TP's often use synonyms and analogies to explain their theories. Imagine cutting a snowflake out of construction paper. Then you open up the paper and you have an entire circle of a snowflake just because each data point was mirrored via similar traits and analogical data.

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    Will
    Posts
    5,927

    Default

    I think Edison was a Te user, ESTJ to be precise.
    He was definately very bossy and used experience rather than conceptualization to come to basic discoveries.
    A real Ti user would be like an Einstein or a Da Vinci.
    Another real Te user could be Newton, who really made the system move.
    Einstein and Da Vinci on the other hand just sought knowledge.
    A real visionary however can take action to make these dreams real.

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

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DJ Arendee View Post
    So an Se-Ti user punches jerry in the face, jerry cries. "See look, Jerry is thinking about his mother constantly I proved it!" This is one of the flaws with Ti in that if they're not careful it can attribute the wrong information to the actual solution, and the Ti user can become very confident in his reasoning which ultimately doesn't make any sense to anyone else.
    .
    To read something that isn't there is a flaw in perception. Not logic. It's crappy Ni. Something both all SPs engage in, but ESPs moreso. As Jung would say, "[Se Dominant's] intuition, the noblest of human gifts, is a mere personal subtlety, a sniffing into every corner; instead of searching the horizon, it recedes to the narrowest gauge of human meanness."

  8. #8
    failure to thrive AphroditeGoneAwry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    MBTI
    INfj
    Enneagram
    451 sx/so
    Socionics
    ENFj Ni
    Posts
    5,651

    Default

    I agree with the OP!
    Ni/Ti/Fe/Si
    4w5 5w4 1w9
    ~Torah observant, Christ inspired~
    Life Path 11

    The more one loves God, the more it is that having nothing in the world means everything, and the less one loves God, the more it is that having everything in the world means nothing.

    Do not resist an evil person, but to him who strikes you on the one cheek, offer also the other. ~Matthew 5:39

    songofmary.wordpress.com


  9. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Salomé View Post
    Boiled down, Te is pragmatic; Ti is aesthetic.
    What do you mean by Ti is aesthetic? It cares for elegance in the method?

  10. #10
    WALMART
    Guest

    Default

    Ti likes to do the talking, Te likes to have others talk for them.

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