User Tag List

123 Last

Results 1 to 10 of 31

  1. #1

    Default I'd like some input from Ti users.

    Hey guys, I was curious to know how xxTP minds work when using the introverted thinking function. If an introverted feeler user wanted to develop his or her Ti, what exercises can he or she do to strengthen the function? Activities such as crosswords, rubik cubes, geometry, etc...

    And also, I've been curious on how Fi and Ti differ from each other. I tend to always be in doubt of what people say. It's hard for me to apply judgement to a person's view because I think that there's an off chance that the person might be right. For example, if someone was to claim that magnesium helped alleviate muscle pain, I wouldn't know whether to dismiss it as right or wrong since I am unknowledgable in the subject.

    I've read that Ti users tend to gravitate towards their own logical reasoning. When making decisions, do you tend to weigh out the pros and cons of the situation? And if you do, wouldn't that be considered using Te since it's an outward expression of thinking in a tangible, written form (charts, graphs, lists, pros and cons etc)? And also, as a Ti user, have you or do you get the conception that society is 'fake'? If so, what is your definition of 'fake' and how does it qualify?

    I find Ti users fascinating and I'm interested in seeing in more detail how Ti and Fi would differ. I would love to hear some input from you guys.

  2. #2
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    P#1: Since natural Ti users never had to "make themselves develop Ti," you're kinda on your own intuition here on what might work for you. Honestly, to me, it's more about being detached and perceiving a standardizes set of values (including cause and effect) that govern the world around you, instead of applying your own moral logic. You should be going more for a sense of what is correct vs incorrect, rather than right vs wrong. The laws of physics are very Ti, for example; as well as other laws/principles that govern the world at large. Those laws seem to accurate describe reality, regardless of who is viewing them or applying them.

    P#2: That's fine to admit when you are unknowledgeable. In fact, Ti would demand that you acknowledge holes/ambiguities in your logic. You need to identify the boundaries of your perception clearly and state all assumptions up front. That's what INTPs do: Bound information. Once you define the limits your knowledge, anything within your knowledge area can be spoken about and modeled accurately going by observed principles. If I am discussing things with someone who is an expert in an area that I am not in terms of raw information, I usually just ask more questions, and the only things I challenge them on are logical errors / reasoning errors, rather than errors that might be based on details I have no idea of knowing are true or not.

    P#3: Yes, I use a pro's and con's list; and no, not necessarily Te. The pro's and con's list is based on reasoning principles and is usually more conceptual in nature. There's usually fuzzy logic and maybe even induction involved. For the second part, society is "fake" in the sense that it is a construct -- just like the Matrix. It's a bunch of agreed-upon social rules that enables a group to function... maybe. If I bitch about society's rules, it usually because I don't think the rule(s) properly reflects reality and actually is inefficient, causes negative outcomes, or hurts people more than helps them. I can appreciate social rules that seem to serve a rational/useful purpose and make interaction more efficient, grants the individual autonomy/freedom, etc.

    Usually I think Fi is different in the same way people have been distinguishing it from Fe: It differs from person to person and is built off the moral sense of right/wrong and what is important/unimportant to the Fi user / personal Fi values. Ti is far more universal; you get a bunch of INTPs in a room and typically they're agree about the reasoning process used (the "rational values" are the same), and usually disagreement occurs because one person's assumptions that bound the argument are different from another person's.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  3. #3

    Default

    Thank you, that was very in depth and interesting to read.

    I think I understand what you mean by having a set of values. Could you expand on that and give some examples? (like cause and effect) Also, when you talk about going for what is correct vs incorrect, what if there is a logical inconsistency in someone's explanation, although the majority of it seemed correct. Would you then proceed to writing off the whole thing as 'incorrect' and choose to believe nothing or would you try and separate what is right and wrong and believe what makes sense to you? For example, I'm in philosophy class and learning about differing philosophies of different philosophers. My view on philosophies is that everyone has a portion of truth to what they teach but it applies in different situations in different people. Therefore I refuse to believe in a certain criteria of a philosophy and am very accepting of whatever philosophy a person will believe in. Would a person using Ti latch onto one philosophy and search for incongruence until something better comes a long? Or would you create your own system of philosophy and compare it to others?

    I agree with what you wrote in the third paragraph. It seems that society's rules is based on the consensus of the majority and in today's world being independent and efficient is a minority.

    Another question... one big difference that I see between Ti users and myself is at the time of stress. For example, when I am depressed or in a drained mood, I have a very strong compulsion to be comforted. I can be generalizing here but do you think this behavior will be more susceptible to Fi users than Ti? My guess on how Ti users would differ is that they would see their problem in an objective view, taking in differing perspectives, and arriving at a conclusion to do what is necessary to solve the problem if possible.

    To be blunt, I am interested in knowing how to develop Ti since it seems to be similar to how my cognitive therapist is suggesting to solve my issues.

  4. #4
    Senior Member wildcat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,619

    Default

    The point is where they do not differ.

  5. #5
    insert random title here Randomnity's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    6w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    9,489

    Default

    You'd likely have more luck asking people of the same type as you how to develop and understand Ti. Ti-doms don't tend to spend much time thinking about that.
    -end of thread-

  6. #6
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    I think I understand what you mean by having a set of values. Could you expand on that and give some examples? (like cause and effect)
    I don't really have time to do that the justice it would deserve. Basically we get a sense of "how something works" just like that book "The Way Things Work" by David MacCauley (at least, I do). Except it just doesn't have to be machines, it can be people, social systems, economic systems, religious theology, whatever... big-picture cohesive function based on observation as well as rational theory. This is how we so easily recognize inconsistencies in underlying principles.

    Also, when you talk about going for what is correct vs incorrect, what if there is a logical inconsistency in someone's explanation, although the majority of it seemed correct. Would you then proceed to writing off the whole thing as 'incorrect' and choose to believe nothing or would you try and separate what is right and wrong and believe what makes sense to you?
    It depends on the person. I find it more useful to acknowledge the coherent parts of a model (whether it's a theory, person, machine, system, or whatever), as well as to highlight specifically what the flaw(s) is, and then envision (sometimes without even trying) what that flaw could be replaced with to make the whole thing consistent again. I think to reject an entire system just because it's flawed is kind of immature and unrealistic, you won't get far in life if you're that rigid; instead, recognize the flaws and then compensate for them / avoid them.
    So you can learn from any flawed thing, as long as you can label the "flawed part" as such and just take the good stuff.
    For example, I'm in philosophy class and learning about differing philosophies of different philosophers. My view on philosophies is that everyone has a portion of truth to what they teach but it applies in different situations in different people.
    To quibble, I would not say that everyone has a portion of the truth, someone is capable of being ENTIRELY wrong... but -- going along with your point -- no one is capable of being ENTIRELY right. So I would take the good parts and see if I can integrate them in some way to make a universal model better.
    Therefore I refuse to believe in a certain criteria of a philosophy and am very accepting of whatever philosophy a person will believe in.
    Well, once we get into philosophy in that sense, it's almost starting to sound spiritual/religious... at that point, whatever people want to believe is their own business. I can still criticize the rationale of the belief, but people are permitted to believe whatever want, however coherent or however incoherent. So it sounds like we both have the same response, but I think our motivations are a little different.

    Would a person using Ti latch onto one philosophy and search for incongruence until something better comes a long? Or would you create your own system of philosophy and compare it to others?
    That is a personal preference. However, INTPs are typically model builders i.e., architects by nature, so it's not far-fetched for the latter to occur naturally. ISTPs are more hands-on and would rather act according to a coherent model than sit around and define/speculate the model like the INTP would. (So one is more "think it" and the other is more "live it.")

    I agree with what you wrote in the third paragraph. It seems that society's rules is based on the consensus of the majority and in today's world being independent and efficient is a minority.
    I see that as unavoidable for big systems with no established/protective bondaries. The more complex a model becomes, and the less that one vision can direct it, the more ineffecient/muddled it's going to become regardless of good rationale or intent.

    Another question... one big difference that I see between Ti users and myself is at the time of stress. For example, when I am depressed or in a drained mood, I have a very strong compulsion to be comforted.
    What do you mean by comforted?
    I can be generalizing here but do you think this behavior will be more susceptible to Fi users than Ti? My guess on how Ti users would differ is that they would see their problem in an objective view, taking in differing perspectives, and arriving at a conclusion to do what is necessary to solve the problem if possible.
    ISTP might want to "solve it," INTP wants to "understand it" but otherwise might not feel the need to "fix" anything.

    To be blunt, I am interested in knowing how to develop Ti since it seems to be similar to how my cognitive therapist is suggesting to solve my issues. ]
    Oh, CBT? Yeah, I would consider that a therapeutic style that is very "T" in nature. You basically decide what healthy/productive behavior would look like (i.e., behavior that accomplishes your stated goals), then determine how to behave until you get there. You also detach from your current behavior and emotions in the process. You don't really need to dive into the feelings and understand them completely or resolve them, the goal is on producing functioning behavior that accomplishes your aims.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  7. #7
    Riva
    Guest

    Default

    Ti is a pain in the ass believe me. It makes you want to analyze, scrutinize and categorize every ounce of information which crosses your mind, what you see or what you hear.

    Pain in the ass.

    It gives the impression that you think too much. xxTPs don't think too much at all. (Especially in IxTP's) Ti makes one wants to put every thing in order in it's head.

    urghh!

  8. #8
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,442

    Default

    Both Nardi's 8 Keys To Self-Leadership, and Hartzler's Functions of Type give "exercises" to "develop" each of the functions. These generally involve practicing the actions or ways of thinking associated with each.

    Those may help in a way, but I really don't think it's so much about developing skills in such a conscious way. If you prefer Fi, then Ti is something suppressed from consciousness, or more specifically, Thinking is rejected from your internal world, but accepted in a limited basis in your external world. So it's not something you just up and say "OK; I want to learn to do this more". It's a perspective you tend to naturally avoid, but life experiences may bring it more into consciousness.

    Plus the fact that functions can be expressed in terms of "products" (the skills or behaviors everyone talks about) that can be engaged by everyone, as long as it is in harmony with the ego. This is called an "undifferentiated" state. So you can learn to engage those skills more (and those two books would be good for that), but you don't have to think of it as "using" such a totally rejected function more.
    APS Profile: Inclusion: e/w=1/6 (Supine) |Control: e/w=7/3 (Choleric) |Affection: e/w=1/9 (Supine)
    Ti 54.3 | Ne 47.3 | Si 37.8 | Fe 17.7 | Te 22.5 | Ni 13.4 | Se 18.9 | Fi 27.9

    Temperament (APS) from scratch -- MBTI Type from scratch
    Type Ideas

  9. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    I don't really have time to do that the justice it would deserve. Basically we get a sense of "how something works" just like that book "The Way Things Work" by David MacCauley (at least, I do). Except it just doesn't have to be machines, it can be people, social systems, economic systems, religious theology, whatever... big-picture cohesive function based on observation as well as rational theory. This is how we so easily recognize inconsistencies in underlying principles.


    It depends on the person. I find it more useful to acknowledge the coherent parts of a model (whether it's a theory, person, machine, system, or whatever), as well as to highlight specifically what the flaw(s) is, and then envision (sometimes without even trying) what that flaw could be replaced with to make the whole thing consistent again. I think to reject an entire system just because it's flawed is kind of immature and unrealistic, you won't get far in life if you're that rigid; instead, recognize the flaws and then compensate for them / avoid them.
    So you can learn from any flawed thing, as long as you can label the "flawed part" as such and just take the good stuff.

    Interesting. I think Fi's would differ in that things don't have to be as congruent when applied to their system of belief. For me, I will look at a part and just have a feeling that this is somehow related and there is a grain of truth somewhere buried deep there... then again this might be my Ne working and my secondary function failing to catch up.

    To quibble, I would not say that everyone has a portion of the truth, someone is capable of being ENTIRELY wrong... but -- going along with your point -- no one is capable of being ENTIRELY right. So I would take the good parts and see if I can integrate them in some way to make a universal model better.

    I think Fi users will tend to rather accept many differing 'truths' especially when it comes to personal beliefs so they themselves have such strong values they hold to themselves that usually are different from society. They are less tended to construct their system with logical congruencies as Ti users seem to do as they seem to be more accepting of even what may seem to be illogical incongruencies, since feelings themselves may be illogical at times.

    Well, once we get into philosophy in that sense, it's almost starting to sound spiritual/religious... at that point, whatever people want to believe is their own business. I can still criticize the rationale of the belief, but people are permitted to believe whatever want, however coherent or however incoherent. So it sounds like we both have the same response, but I think our motivations are a little different.

    Right, I think a Fi user motivation would be self-acceptance of other people's beliefs as an external desire for others to be accept them as well. Kinda like the Golden Rule. A Ti user, from what I deduce reading what you wrote, will accept differing views of philosophy because spirituality/religion are not logical at all in their essence. Therefore on subjects where logic and rationality cannot apply, you will dismiss your opinion on such a subject.


    That is a personal preference. However, INTPs are typically model builders i.e., architects by nature, so it's not far-fetched for the latter to occur naturally. ISTPs are more hands-on and would rather act according to a coherent model than sit around and define/speculate the model like the INTP would. (So one is more "think it" and the other is more "live it.")
    I think you have a valid point. This highlights the importance from the secondary function (Se vs Ne) and just how much they would make even users who share the same first function of Ti very different.

    I see that as unavoidable for big systems with no established/protective bondaries. The more complex a model becomes, and the less that one vision can direct it, the more ineffecient/muddled it's going to become regardless of good rationale or intent.
    I think people have a tendency to try and instinctually break down complex things. This can be seen in how we will use the subconsciousness to ride a bike without having to consciously think about it or how we thrive on things that will make things easier, faster, more efficient, etc. So when people approach a complex society/government, they will approach at it with a subjective view and utilize the system to make it easier for themselves. Since sensors seem to make up most of the majority (I believe the estimates were around 65~75%), the system is changed, developed, and suited easier for Sensors. A system, no matter how objective and complex, will eventually break down into something more suited for the majority in order to gain efficiency.

    What do you mean by comforted?
    I guess it means I want some ENFJ momma lovin'.

    ISTP might want to "solve it," INTP wants to "understand it" but otherwise might not feel the need to "fix" anything.
    Agreed.

    Oh, CBT? Yeah, I would consider that a therapeutic style that is very "T" in nature. You basically decide what healthy/productive behavior would look like (i.e., behavior that accomplishes your stated goals), then determine how to behave until you get there. You also detach from your current behavior and emotions in the process. You don't really need to dive into the feelings and understand them completely or resolve them, the goal is on producing functioning behavior that accomplishes your aims.
    Right, and the current progress I've made so far with the changed mindset is amazing. I think that developing that kind of thinking (although I'm still quite far from achieving) has a lot of potential and is just what I need. However, due to my Fi nature, I almost have an incessant need to understand my feelings and make sure I have complete control until I can move on. Unfortunately, this leads to me rather brooding over my emotions and not getting any thinking done. Hopefully, maybe, exercising my Ti function can help with this.

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    Both Nardi's 8 Keys To Self-Leadership, and Hartzler's Functions of Type give "exercises" to "develop" each of the functions. These generally involve practicing the actions or ways of thinking associated with each.

    Those may help in a way, but I really don't think it's so much about developing skills in such a conscious way. If you prefer Fi, then Ti is something suppressed from consciousness, or more specifically, Thinking is rejected from your internal world, but accepted in a limited basis in your external world. So it's not something you just up and say "OK; I want to learn to do this more". It's a perspective you tend to naturally avoid, but life experiences may bring it more into consciousness.
    I'm trying to use Ti and yes, it does seem to take conscious effort to use. When I am using Ti, I have to make sure that I am going step by step and I will constantly question my thoughts to determine if I am using another function. It does get very tiring but then again, I just started so I'm sure it's going to get easier as time goes on.
    Plus the fact that functions can be expressed in terms of "products" (the skills or behaviors everyone talks about) that can be engaged by everyone, as long as it is in harmony with the ego. This is called an "undifferentiated" state. So you can learn to engage those skills more (and those two books would be good for that), but you don't have to think of it as "using" such a totally rejected function more.
    Thank you for the book titles, I'll be sure to check them out.
    ^

  10. #10
    Senior Member guesswho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    1,983

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by daftpunkcrunk View Post
    Hey guys, I was curious to know how xxTP minds work when using the introverted thinking function. If an introverted feeler user wanted to develop his or her Ti, what exercises can he or she do to strengthen the function? Activities such as crosswords, rubik cubes, geometry, etc...

    And also, I've been curious on how Fi and Ti differ from each other. I tend to always be in doubt of what people say. It's hard for me to apply judgement to a person's view because I think that there's an off chance that the person might be right. For example, if someone was to claim that magnesium helped alleviate muscle pain, I wouldn't know whether to dismiss it as right or wrong since I am unknowledgable in the subject.

    I've read that Ti users tend to gravitate towards their own logical reasoning. When making decisions, do you tend to weigh out the pros and cons of the situation? And if you do, wouldn't that be considered using Te since it's an outward expression of thinking in a tangible, written form (charts, graphs, lists, pros and cons etc)? And also, as a Ti user, have you or do you get the conception that society is 'fake'? If so, what is your definition of 'fake' and how does it qualify?

    I find Ti users fascinating and I'm interested in seeing in more detail how Ti and Fi would differ. I would love to hear some input from you guys.
    It's hard to develop a function if you barely use it. You are naturally inclined to use specific functions, without doing effort. Why would anyone put effort into behaving unnatural?
    I think the main difference between Ti and Fi is Objectivity/Subjectivity.
    I didn't really look into STP, so I'm talking more about the NTP.
    It's all about finding the rational truth, governed by laws and that makes perfect sense. See... I get very pissed off when people say things that don't make any sense.
    For instance, a friend started talking to me about signs. As in, you have a dream and consider it a sign that something will happen in the future, etc. Pure bullshit.
    He is Fe dominant. He also talks about spirits, God, and other things that piss me off. Not doing specific things in a specific day, because God forbids them also ...bullshit.
    Things must make 100% sense, not 50%, not 70%, you need to know exactly how and what.
    I also observed that NTPs doubt things, it may be Ti related I do not know for sure.

    For instance, you have a concept. Seemed bulletproof. But you doubt it, you deconstruct it, and reconstruct it, to see if you end up where you started from.
    Ti is all about wondering about all sorts of crap, why is this that why is that that, why does this fit here and not there, it's also about patterns and logic.
    I don't know if the pattern seeking thing is 100% Ti, or it's because of the NT combination, but it is present.

    You seek patterns in people, wonder why they do the things they do, try to see the cycle of things. To make some mental order of the apparent chaos that you see outside.

    Ti users often leave the impression that they think too much...I've heard that a lot. But you can't help it...why should you be satisfied with partial stuff, instead of knowing the whole?????

    I actually like the Ti functon, but, I'm not Ti dominant so...

    Anyway, this is Ti, I haven't talked about Fi, because I don't wanna talk crap. I know much more about Ti than Fi.

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Also CBT is pretty much like Ti.
    However by developing Ti, you won't get rid of your issues.
    INTPs also get depressed etc, and they're Ti dom. You should confront your stuff in your own NATURAL way . : )

Similar Threads

  1. [ENFJ] I'd like some advice from some ENFJ's :)
    By Jonathanthegreat in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 05-27-2009, 11:58 AM
  2. Top three people you'd like to meet from MBTIc
    By rhinosaur in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 153
    Last Post: 02-04-2009, 10:13 PM
  3. [INTP] I need some input from INTPs
    By Sunshine8 in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 60
    Last Post: 11-04-2008, 10:22 AM
  4. Like some Magic in your life? :D
    By white in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 111
    Last Post: 01-23-2008, 09:13 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