# Thread: Do N and T really go together?

1. Originally Posted by Athenian200
Congratulations on all that. Good going. You're a very accomplished INTP.

Could you explain the joke now? So us less brilliant people can get it?
And that's the fifth thing, that I didn't actually explain myself. And sixth, that the other person pointed it out for me. And seventh, that it wasn't really much of a joke in the first place, but I saw your response and then improv'd all this.

But fo srs:
My N and T are quite complimentary. T sees a problem and tries to solve it. It's like a jigsaw puzzle as jenocyde explained earlier and as I wrote in this thread from a while ago.

Thinking is not linear, at least Ti isn't.

As I've described it before:
Originally Posted by Costrin
Introverted Thinking
Ti is an introverted judging process. It takes data given by Extraverted Perceiving and judges it. Ti basically takes the data, and “melds” with it, it analyzes it from all angles until it understands the essential qualities of it completely. This is a non-linear, almost unconscious process, and it does not make use of logic. The logic of Ti comes from the fact that the data is understood completely, including all the rules of how it operates, which is logical. For example, if you use a hammer on a nail, Ti figures out how the force of the hammer causes the nail to be driven into the wood, and how far, and at what angle, etc. It takes in all the variables simultaneously and figures out how the system as a whole works, but if asked, it's answer will likely be something along the lines of “because that's how it works, can't you see that?”. Whereas a Te approach would be to take the force of the swing, the weight of the hammer, surface area, length of the nail, density of the wood, angle the nail is hit, etc and preform a lengthy and complicated math problem. As you can see, Te is just plain inefficient here (ironically, considering Te is all about efficiency). Furthermore, Ti is experiential. It relies upon actual real world data seen personally by the individual. Here is where much of the confusion arises. Because of the nature of Ne, it allows you to see things that don't actually physically exist, and Ti is able to utilize that data, but fundamentally, the individual is still experiencing it. The experiential nature of Ti is much more noticeable when paired with Se. Se gives physical external data which Ti uses. The above hammer example is TiSe in action. Another place where Ti is evident is in music. Where a Te approach to learning to play an instrument would be to learn the scales and chords and how to read sheet music and all that, Ti would learn by doing. It would learn by experimenting with the instrument, by listening to music and hearing the underlying structure and then applying that to the individual's own playing. It learns how different sounds fit together by hearing it, as opposed to someone telling you for example, “the first plus third plus fifth notes in a scale make a major chord which sounds good” in a very mathematical and mechanical way.

2. Originally Posted by Costrin
My N and T are quite complimentary. T sees a problem and tries to solve it. It's like a jigsaw puzzle as jenocyde explained earlier and as I wrote in this thread from a while ago.

Thinking is not linear, at least Ti isn't.

As I've described it before:
Okay, that makes sense for Ti. I guess I was just picturing how Te tends to be structured, kind of forgot about Ti being considered Thinking.

After thinking about it, the only thing that really points to my idea is that N and F are both subjective, and S and T are both objective. Which isn't really a good reason for one to go with the other.

I suppose I see how it works for NTPs now, anyway.

3. How I imagine NiTe:

Ni perceives all the various ways things can be viewed, all the various ways things could be connected. Te then picks from all those various perspectives, and chooses the most efficient of them. Te is concerned with structure and efficiency, and not so much with correctness and factual accuracy. NiTe wants to manipulate the system. It says "if things were organized in this new manner, then that would lead to a 17% decrease in operating costs." Even money is a very NiTe concept. It manipulates how things are perceived and then puts an objective value on it. A gallon of milk suddenly becomes equal to a few slips of paper. Money leads to an objective bargaining system which allows for efficiency in trading of goods.

4. Originally Posted by Costrin
How I imagine NiTe:

Ni perceives all the various ways things can be viewed, all the various ways things could be connected. Te then picks from all those various perspectives, and chooses the most efficient of them. Te is concerned with structure and efficiency, and not so much with correctness and factual accuracy. NiTe wants to manipulate the system. It says "if things were organized in this new manner, then that would lead to a 17% decrease in operating costs." Even money is a very NiTe concept. It manipulates how things are perceived and then puts an objective value on it. A gallon of milk suddenly becomes equal to a few slips of paper. Money leads to an objective bargaining system which allows for efficiency in trading of goods.
Huh. Sounds plausible. Switch people for systems, and appropriate for efficient, and you've pretty much got me. It's little more than a simple replaced ruleset. They have a strategy/efficiency guide in their heads instead of an etiquette/protocol manual. I guess it was as simple as I would have thought after all...

One odd quirk I've noticed in NTJ processing is that they're sometimes more concerned with how they want to use a system, than understanding a system. Sometimes this is so pronounced that it's obvious the NTJ doesn't have a clear understanding of the system, and is just especially skilled in getting it to work for them. I suppose their strong will and sense of what they want out of something makes up for it, though.

5. Don't judge me! Don't judge meeeeeee!

For what it's worth, I think Ni/Te may prefer "real" and "unreal" as evaluations. Ti can have "true" and "false."

6. Originally Posted by Kalach
Don't judge me! Don't judge meeeeeee!
Relax, I'm not wearing a powdered wig and wielding a gavel or anything like that. I'm just trying to figure out the Ni/Te thing... we're not casting any judgments on your individual nature. No need to be defensive.

For what it's worth, I think Ni/Te may prefer "real" and "unreal" as evaluations. Ti can have "true" and "false."
Okay. That's an interesting assessment. Why "real" and "unreal"?

7. I really don't think the human brain can be defined by four letters. I would not go so deep into the MBTI, but rather spend more time understanding the human vbrain instead.

Because MBTI roots comes from psuedoscience.

If you really want an explanation:

N finds puzzle pieces in reality
T puts these puzzle pieces togethjer and develop an experimental model
S specifically Se, put abstract ideas into motion to see how puzzle pieces really work in reality

That is my mind summed up

8. Actually, I want to amend the list of evaluations and claim a four valued logic, so there's true, false, real and unreal... and combinations.

Real and true is a positive combination evaluation, and so is unreal but true. Unreal and false is teh bad, just because it's boring, but real and false is a worstest.

Adding in evaluations that include a category of "real" is a Te thing... somehow... since Te is focused outward, out there, at "reality." Allowing unreal but true is an Ni thing.

And that's how N and T go together in NTJ.

(He says, hoping the four values amount to a viable hypothesis.)

It kinda undermines the whole "true" thing to say "real" is a subjective evaluation, but it sorta is... it's the word the user uses when he "thinks" he's getting where he's going... and it's not ever going to feel right to outright call it subjective because, dang it! it's REAL!

9. Are you serious man, being a NT is like being an intelligent stoner. You can make even the craziest things make sense.

10. too much N is bad for your health. N is checked by S and T. Meaning that T and S help stabilize the N. F is more complementry to N. I hope that expklains what you want to know.

#### Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
•