Lots of explanations about why NT don't go together but could someone explain more why they think SF don't go together well.
The linear progression would be:
You say that thinking is flat and one dimensional, which leads me to believe that you don't like to think, or that you think in a one dimensional manner only or that you don't think at all. Earlier, I gave you two very clear examples of how I process information. Now, I would like to see the way you process information. The statement you made is curious at best.
Can you give us an example?
Right. And I think, in that case, that NT thought is not confined to sequential deduction. This is perhaps the reason that mathematics departments are refugee camps for NTs. In my experience theorem proving is rarely a sequential process (even though the final product is usually a very clean, logical argument). The process of starting a proof has always been, for me, a kind of synthesis where several of the needed pieces fall into place at the same time, and they aren't organized until I write them on paper.
N and T go together. People with a marked ability for theoretical or abstract reasoning are NTs.
Lots of explanations about why NT don't go together but could someone explain more why they think SF don't go together well.
I would explain how N and T go together, but my Ne threw a rock at Ti. Ti then got his buddy Si and ganged up on Ne while Fe sat in a corner crying.
Oh, I know how that is. My functions don't always get along either. They can be SO mean to each other sometimes. Like this:
Ni laughs at a joke, but then Fe slaps her because it was offensive. Then Ni runs to complain to Ti, and they both gang up against Fe, teasing her until she cries. Se just goes "Whatever," puts on his headphones, and keeps playing video games and drinking soda.
Oh I see. That's interesting, because I was joking.
Yes. To make things absolutely clear, I was making fun of your understanding of N and T.
Now what. Feel insulted.
.....
Please?
I feel so insulted and pathetic. Waa!!! Okay, I'm finished feeling insulted now.
I guess I missed the joke. My Ne doesn't work. So, what were you making fun of regarding my understanding of N and T? What was the joke?
See ladies and gentlemen? That's like four things in one. I managed to get the satisfaction from insulting someone, the satisfaction from making a joke that goes over someone's head, the chance to brag about it, and all without actually offending anyone.
Skillz.
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?
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.
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:
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.
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."