Great. Now she'll go on Pers Cafe and tell them about all the awards she gets here at TypoC, to try to make them feel bad...
"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
Great post, thank you. That's an interesting point. I think it's more or less what I was trying to say, just in more precise terms.
I suspect that there are two causes of this:
A) That Ti and Fi are not focused on the same aspects of people (so one sees and emphasizes similarities that the other either doesn't notice or doesn't consider important), and
B) Fi users consider categorization in Te terms, so they want any categories to be objectively verifiable, empirically evident and static according to collective standards for impersonal ideas. They don't seem to recognize that Ti categories are neither static nor objectively measurable because they describe only blueprints and not real processes with measurable truth/falsehood. They're more continually evolving overarching explanations for the frameworks of everything, but they're constantly subtly adjusted every time we gain new information.
Ti is really just as subjective as Fi! It's just not ethics-focused in most cases.
Consider that as we move away from an introverted perspective and toward an extroverted one, we sacrifice depth and precision in order to gain breadth and broader/more externally realistic applicability. So Te only uses categories insofar as they can be applied consistently and unflinchingly across many contexts, and in order to achieve this they sacrifice some depth and precision. Te users dislike the degree to which Ti will emphasize its own personal experience in its formulation of categories, because when those categories are constantly changed and updated in order to reflect reality in total completeness and depth in real time, there's no way they can have yet passed through the Te process of objective verification and collective consensus; therefore, since they seem to work fully and reliably only for the Ti user himself, they have no objective value. Ti constantly states, "I think", but Te users do not value a Thinking idea until it has had time to work its way into the Te-friendly, "We think", and thus comes off as too speculative and insistent upon an unrealistic degree of precision.
That's interesting, I never thought of that as a Te influenced thing. This all makes me wonder about the relationship between Fi-dom and Ti-dom approaches to critical thinking; if these two subjectives attitudes to it can ever result in any similarities when they are divided by their Te and Fe influences.
As for the whole Fi opposition to categorization: I don't have a problem with it. Fortunately, I am able to "use my Ti" and recognize the need for such things
INFP 4w5 so/sp
I've dreamt in my life dreams that have stayed with me ever after, and changed my ideas;
they've gone through and through me, like wine through water, and altered the colour of my mind.
- Emily Bronte
You know, this is not unlike some poor, bitter guy running up to the ex-girlfriend who dumped him & bragging to her about how much better his new girlfriend is & how much she missed the boat. But! also! pointedly asking if she has someone new in her life/if she's seeing someone else. Funny huh?
On a less aggravated note, I like your Dom/Tert Loop & Personality Disorder theory, very interesting. It makes me wonder, though, why you never posted anything nearly as cool while you were here. All that time & you were holding out on us, champ! Sad.