[Ti] Does Ti always "feel" right?

[The_Liquid_Laser]

Q's:
Do you find other Ti users can "mirror" your thoughts accurately or think the same thing you would in a situation-like Fi users mirror feelings? (I have seen a few "get out of my head" comments that may be indicative of this)

The thought process is what is similar with other Ti users. I find that we can disagree with each other's conclusion, and yet we can follow each other's thought process. The things that I say in a normal "discussion" with another TP could easily turn into an argument with someone else, because they don't understand how I'm reasoning.

Does Ti "feel" the conclusions it reaches are "right" the way Fi does? (Feel may not be the best word choice)

If you reach a logical conclusion does it "feel" correct?

What input is required to change the answer?

What time frame is involved in changing the answer?

A conclusion is only correct given that the assumptions are correct. I'm never 100% certain that the assumptions are correct. However I am 100% that the conclusions are correct if the assumptions are correct.

Ti makes me love Truth, but at the same time I think that ultimate truth is ultimately unknowable. Instead I have degrees of certainty. I think this might be what makes me as an ENTP different from an INTP. I don't have one big framework that tries to fit everything together. Instead Ne creates a lot of different scenarios and Ti determines how each scenario will turn out.

Everything I believe is just my best guess, but Ti works out the conclusions to different scenarios based on these guesses. Sometimes I "feel" my best guess has 99% certainty of being true, and other times I might only think it has a 55% certainty. As I get new information I'm constantly reevaluating how much certainty I have to each assumption. If I become confident in a new assumption then I start believing scenario B is true rather than the old scenario A, but scenario B is often worked out to some degree beforehand by Ti.

With Ti I really don't "feel" anything is correct. It's just my best guess. But the "best guess" with Ti is more accurate than the "sure thing" of the other functions.

 

[JocktheMotie]

That's interesting that the relationship isn't symmetric. It does seem like the nature of the functions themselves play a role in what the effect is of having a certain function in given slot (like tertiary, auxiliary or whatever).

Thanks for your responses. It's interesting to hear about Ti from a Ti-dom's perspective.

I think this is an interesting topic and I don't really see that much about it. I've wondered how Fe doms work inferior Ti into their lives, and from the responses I've gotten it seems to be far less conflicting of a process than my Fe us.

Contrary to what Fluffy says, I do think Ti manifests itself differently in different positions, like for INTPs and ENTPs.

 

[Fluffywolf]

Contrary to what Fluffy says, I do think Ti manifests itself differently in different positions, like for INTPs and ENTPs.

I agree it works different in any other type but INTPs and ENTPs and that only for INTPs and ENTPs it is very similar. With the slight different that it is differently orchestrated. Whereas Ti in other types then to -only- be used as a tool or a form of support, like the reserve army. Whereas INTPs and ENTPs use Ti in a much more advanced manner. With it being part of the main army. INTP's the spearhead, ENTP's the Archers.

Pardon the fairly lame analogy, I seem to enjoy it.

Ti itself seems a very unchanging cognative function. It only does a particular thing and can't really be used any differently. It only differs in how much you use it and to what end. And only INTPs and ENTPs rely on it greatly.

 

[JocktheMotie]

I agree it works different in any other type but INTPs and ENTPs and that only for INTPs and ENTPs it is very similar. With the slight different that it is differently orchestrated. Whereas Ti in other types then to -only- be used as a tool or a form of support, like the reserve army. Whereas INTPs and ENTPs use Ti in a much more advanced manner. With it being part of the main army. INTP's the spearhead, ENTP's the Archers.

Pardon the fairly lame analogy, I seem to enjoy it.

Ti itself seems a very unchanging cognative function. It only does a particular thing and can't really be used any differently. It only differs in how much you use it and to what end. And only INTPs and ENTPs rely on it greatly.

This I can agree with, especially its prominence in NTPs. I do think Ns in general rely more on their judging functions than Ss do, but this is more of a raw observation I've made at this point and is just anecdotal.

 

[Seymour]

I think this is an interesting topic and I don't really see that much about it. I've wondered how Fe doms work inferior Ti into their lives, and from the responses I've gotten it seems to be far less conflicting of a process than my Fe us.

I agree it's an interesting topic. In some ways, it's frustrating to only have one subjective view on things. Makes it kind of impossible to tease apart how much of the nature of my relationship to a function is because of the nature of the function itself, its slot/ranking or some interplay of the two. That's one reason I have a hard time related to Beebe's archetypal labels for the shadow functions, I think. (But that's another topic entirely.)

Contrary to what Fluffy says, I do think Ti manifests itself differently in different positions, like for INTPs and ENTPs.

I agree it works different in any other type but INTPs and ENTPs and that only for INTPs and ENTPs it is very similar. With the slight different that it is differently orchestrated. Whereas Ti in other types then to -only- be used as a tool or a form of support, like the reserve army. Whereas INTPs and ENTPs use Ti in a much more advanced manner. With it being part of the main army. INTP's the spearhead, ENTP's the Archers.

Pardon the fairly lame analogy, I seem to enjoy it.

Bah! I like it. (Like a NF is going to go hating on an analogy.)

For me, feels like Ti is always waiting in the wings to step in (still in a support role, but a very prominent one and more visible on a daily basis at work than my Fi is). I don't think that's typical for all INFPs.

Ti itself seems a very unchanging cognative function. It only does a particular thing and can't really be used any differently. It only differs in how much you use it and to what end. And only INTPs and ENTPs rely on it greatly.

I also find the question of compartmentalizing interesting. My dad, an ESTJ, can apply one principle/criterion on one context, and a conflicting principle/criterion in another, yet suffers no apparent cognitive dissonance. It seems wildly inconsistent from my perspective. I assumed that was the nature of Te, but now I'm not so sure. Sounds like it may be some introversion/extraversion (perhaps with some Je/Ji interaction). Maybe being more extraverted and being better at adapting to reality makes one more tolerant of that kind of thing.

 

[Bubbleboy]

... So I take it then, that Fi is shallow and pendantic?
*leans back in chair ignorantly with a smug smile*

 

[Fluffywolf]

... So I take it then, that Fi is shallow and pendantic?
*leans back in chair ignorantly with a smug smile*

If I didn't know any better, it would appear more of an ENFP trait at the moment. Being shallow and pedantic, that is.

 

[Bubbleboy]

Damnit I can't find the youtube clip I was quoting. Though I'm fine with being shallow and pedantic. Sounds cooler than lazy.

 

[Fluffywolf]

Damnit I can't find the youtube clip I was quoting. Though I'm fine with being shallow and pedantic. Sounds cooler than lazy.

It's a good thing I do know better, ya lazy bum.

 

[The_Liquid_Laser]

Damnit I can't find the youtube clip I was quoting. Though I'm fine with being shallow and pedantic. Sounds cooler than lazy.

I found this one but it's not good quality.

[youtube=nq64IAgsqmk]Shallow and pedantic[/youtube]

 

[sculpting]

Whereas INTPs and ENTPs use Ti in a much more advanced manner. With it being part of the main army. INTP's the spearhead, ENTP's the Archers.

Pardon the fairly lame analogy, I seem to enjoy it.

Ti itself seems a very unchanging cognative function. It only does a particular thing and can't really be used any differently. It only differs in how much you use it and to what end. And only INTPs and ENTPs rely on it greatly.

Much thanks for the commentary and discussion so far. I really like the above analogy FW, but what about ISTP/ESTPs? They use Ti exceptionally well. Hmmm, I must go think on the ISTP and his change time span....

Thanks Seymour! Part of these thoughts were also prompted from your comment on the other thread regarding Ti/Fi and how Fi takes time to think through changes...

I have always thought Ti and Fi are very similar cognitive programs-they are doing the same thing but Fi has to deal with a much nastier set of incoming data. People are kinda messy. So Fi ends up being happy with exceptionally messy, partially matched solutions, contaminated and coded with massive emotional tags? I dunno...

Ti=logical precision
Fi=elmer's glue in buckets with crayon smiley faces on the sides

 

[JocktheMotie]

I have always thought Ti and Fi are very similar cognitive programs-they are doing the same thing but Fi has to deal with a much nastier set of incoming data. People are kinda messy. So Fi ends up being happy with exceptionally messy, partially matched solutions, contaminated and coded with massive emotional tags? I dunno...

Ti=logical precision
Fi=elmer's glue in buckets with crayon smiley faces on the sides

I think this has to do with the nature of Fi in that the values it operates by are very personal and the Fi user identifies with those values in a very, very intimate manner. It seems like the values are extensions of themselves, and if the values are violated, then they feel violated. At least, that is my perception. But while this can be a source for sensitivity, it can also be an "anchor" of sorts in the face of conflicting external values.

 

[sculpting]

I find this eerily familiar, but from more of an Fi perspective. As I'm talking with someone, I'm definitely building up a mental model of what they are getting at, and making adjustments as they continue to speak. I'm also leaping ahead, thinking about the implications of what they are saying and what they are likely to say next. This experience seems to be different than that of some of my more Sensing coworkers, who are more likely be thrown if someone accidentally switches two terms during an explanation.

Later, though, I think Fi users will try to process whatever data was presented. Fi is clearly more filtering than Ti, so not everything gets through.

Huh... that's interesting. I make my living mostly through Ti, not Fi. I feel like my Ti got trained in formal education, and then even more through job experience (since I work as a programmer). I admit I use my Ti more specifically and less globally than a real Ti user would. I also use it to back goals that mostly come from Fi.

It seems like Fi doesn't get the same formal training and that it's not valued as much by our culture in general. I wonder if Ti users would see Fi as generally more useful if they had been forced to develop it to some degree.

(Not that some Ti users can't and don't develop Fi, it just seems less required by our culture.)

Seymour, Noigmn and blackcat both wrote at different times they feel like they use Fi like Ti. Do you think as problems become less and less people centric, Fi becomes more robust and logical, thus approximating Ti? I have no idea, just throwing it out there. I cant tell if I do this or not. Fi seems massively diffuse, then Te chunks everything in buckets. Maybe this is clearer for Fi doms?

There are several Fi doms/auxs here who work in technical areas-Scott and Noigmn are both physicists.

I find it interesting that this is a "flaw", so to speak. It seems like many of us have trouble with the old phrase "reasonable people can disagree".

It was a convo of massive meta proportions. She was correct in that I, as an individual Fite, understanding what I do, should be open to redefining my expectations and ideas about life understanding the more optimistic side of life that feti can see. I was correct, in that, you cannot expect the masses to be able to do that, so to implement change on a large scale in an organization, an feti has to be willing to address the issues that accompany folks who are fite.

But fite is a petulant whiny bitch and likes to pout so it took a few days mulling the thought over to recognize she was correct. It's how we roll...

 

[Seymour]

I think this has to do with the nature of Fi in that the values it operates by are very personal and the Fi user identifies with those values in a very, very intimate manner. It seems like the values are extensions of themselves, and if the values are violated, then they feel violated. At least, that is my perception. But while this can be a source for sensitivity, it can also be an "anchor" of sorts in the face of conflicting external values.

I think this has to do with the nature of Fi in that the values it operates by are very personal and the Fi user identifies with those values in a very, very intimate manner. It seems like the values are extensions of themselves, and if the values are violated, then they feel violated. At least, that is my perception. But while this can be a source for sensitivity, it can also be an "anchor" of sorts in the face of conflicting external values.

I think you are definitely on target. That's why in another thread I was recommending Ti users give Fi users time for offline processing after presenting conflicting information. In the moment the impulse towards self-preservation is likely to win out over doing any real logical processing. Things only get worse if the Ti user pushes for instant acknowledgement and value-adjustment on the Fi user's part.

For things that aren't perceived as personal threats, I think Fi users are pretty willing to entertain all kinds of perspectives. Some of the "I know what I feel and I know what works for me" attitude is useful for being unperturbed when encountered a foreign perspective (even an irritational one). I admit we aren't flexible at all when something core is at odds, though.

Seymour, Noigmn and blackcat both wrote at different times they feel like they use Fi like Ti. Do you think as problems become less and less people centric, Fi becomes more robust and logical, thus approximating Ti? I have no idea, just throwing it out there. I cant tell if I do this or not. Fi seems massively diffuse, then Te chunks everything in buckets. Maybe this is clearer for Fi doms?

I think it's possible that we technical INFPs are using some weirdly optimized form of Fi, but I suspect mostly not given personal experience. I work as a computer programmer at the lowest levels of our software framework. I tend to work on some of the most complicated and finicky parts of our code base. When I first started programming full time, I would be exhausted at the end of the day. I also found I felt emotionally deadened at the end of the day, and it would take a bit to shift gears to being more emotionally-oriented and people-centric.

One could argue that what I'm using all day is Te, but I still suck at the more Te parts of things. I'm terrible at long-range planning, scheduling and lining up resources. I'm good at optimizing what I'm doing moment to moment, debugging, making minimal changes for maximal benefits, fitting things into pre-existing models, communicating precisely, etc. Those are things I associate with Ti.

These days, I don't have that issue with switching gears and going from being people-focused and emotional to being logical and critical. I suspect that's because Ti is no longer as much as growing edge for me, and I've learned how to better reconcile my Ti with my Fi.

Anyway, sorry to go on so much about me me me me, but it seemed relevant.


By the way, I think for the STPs Ti use is more focused on the "in the moment optimizations" aspect of things. I think their enjoyment of brinksmanship and pushing limits is because of the intersection of feeding Se and honing and finding the limits of Ti-based skills.

I think it's true that Ti is more "in the moment" generally than Te is. Ne users like to generalize, though, so you end up with a mental framework being continually adjusted and optimized as data becomes available.

 

[William K]

Ti=logical precision
Fi=elmer's glue in buckets with crayon smiley faces on the sides

It's called 'Fuzzy' logic And yeah, I usually don't need firm, definite logic before I decide something (which is not necessarily a good thing)

I think this has to do with the nature of Fi in that the values it operates by are very personal and the Fi user identifies with those values in a very, very intimate manner. It seems like the values are extensions of themselves, and if the values are violated, then they feel violated. At least, that is my perception. But while this can be a source for sensitivity, it can also be an "anchor" of sorts in the face of conflicting external values.

I think of it as being the final decider. I can use the logic and facts that Ne+Si+Ti gives me to make a decision, but depending on how important (or how much 'value' I place in) that decision is, my Fi can over-rule it. It definitely will look irrational to others, but if I feel that I'm 'right', then that's what I'm gonna decide, logic be damned . But I could see how if what I'm pondering is far away from my core, Fi could approximate Ti in its cost-benefit analysis.

 

[Blank]

Sometimes I like to say, "Fuck it," and stir the pot with my stick of Ne, but that tends to happen if I don't feel like devoting any energy to something.

I suppose I could break it down like this:
If it's something I'm invested in and have spent a lot of time on, I'll usually "feel" right unless, of course, I am not sure about my conclusions.
If it's something I don't care about, or don't particularly feel like caring about at that moment, I'll BS all day long.