• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

How much Ti do you use?

sculpting

New member
Joined
Jan 28, 2009
Messages
4,148
It looks like a fair number of NFPs end up in the sciences or other technical fields. I found the below scale in a book called "Functions of Type" (which is only 12 bucks and really interesting). I took the below and ended up with as much Ti as Fi, becuase my Fi is kind of clunky. I wondered how other NFPs look in comparison.

Give yourself a 0 if you never, ever do the item and a 5 if you do it all the time, in your sleep, like breathing. (HINT: I got all fives for the Ne test but tons of zeros on the Fe test.)



Ti 1: I organize data and ideas into a logical internal framework or sets of categories.
Ti 2: I seek data to fill holes in my models, frameworks, blueprints and logical taxonomies
Ti 3: I use my inner understanding of how ideas and things logically fit together to help me understand how things work
Ti 4: I modify models and frameworks to accommodate new data, thereby preserving inner logical consistency
Ti 5: I seek precision in my use of words and in my internal models, frameworks, and blueprints
Ti 6: I logically prioritize categories and components of models in terms of the needs of the situation
Ti 7: I restructure my priorities based upon my category profiles
Ti 8: I make decisions based on my category profiles
Ti 9: I seek logical consistency in my life
Ti 10: I use precise language to try and get the world to understand logical conceptual models and/or blueprints
 

Amargith

Hotel California
Joined
Nov 5, 2008
Messages
14,717
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
4dw
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
hehe, really depends on the topic..Ironically I'll score 7 or 8 5's on your list when I'm analyzing feelings..be it mine or someone elses :D
 

Kalach

Filthy Apes!
Joined
Dec 3, 2008
Messages
4,310
MBTI Type
INTJ
Get over it, you don't use any. You know and use Fi, so that kind of analysis is recognisable to you, then you simulate Ti by seeing connections with Ne.

To do Ti you have to bypass the already weak and complaining Te. It would hurt your head, and generally speaking you'd seek to avoid it!

I for example, avoid Ti like the plague it is. I do none of the 10 points barring point 9.
 

BlueScreen

Fail 2.0
Joined
Nov 8, 2008
Messages
2,668
MBTI Type
YMCA
Ti 1: (0) I do it on output as a communication tool; my internal thinking doesn't require it.
Ti 2: (0) I don't work on any of those things, but I do like to fill holes in my understanding and master plans.
Ti 3: (0) I don't logically fit together ideas, I just get how it works, I logically parse the system to see faults.
Ti 4: (0) Again it isn't models and frameworks, it's perception and world view. It has to make sense. It doesn't have to be in any set scientific domain.
Ti 5: (2) Always optimising for perfection, but not of frameworks or words, more communication and perception.
Ti 6: (5) I'm insanely contextual and subjective
Ti 7: (0) Categorisation isn't a necessity
Ti 8: (0) I make decisions based upon my perception of the situation and consequences of what I see (personal or scientific)
Ti 9: (5) Yes, sense is important.
Ti 10: (2) Again it depends on the person. Accurate communication rules over accuracy of each word. If I write something up though, I want it to explain perfectly and simply.

I think a lot of it is an illusion that we do it. I've never adhered strictly to frameworks and such. But I do aim to get a perfect description of the system. Internally I don't do any of the pondering and rigid technical things, but the output often seems like I do because I have a drive to understand, and help myself and the world see things clearly. Even with writing the messages on here, I write them intuitively, then look at what I've written and screen it with Ne Te for errors. I don't Ti check it in my head as I write. It hits the conscious as a full system, then is checked.

One of the strengths ENFPs have is Fi gets used for psychoanalysis. It is actually a lot more powerful than people give it credit for. If you understand approaches to problems and thinking patterns, you can evolve them and optimise them. And to do it naturally on the fly is quite a gift. Like people can talk about Fi being about feeling good and stuff, and it is about motivations also, but mentally we're like sponges with no set structure. We can absorb, repicate and develop almost anything in the thinking domain. We just have to like it and see a point to it.
 

Amargith

Hotel California
Joined
Nov 5, 2008
Messages
14,717
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
4dw
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Get over it, you don't use any. You know and use Fi, so that kind of analysis is recognisable to you, then you simulate Ti by seeing connections with Ne.

To do Ti you have to bypass the already weak and complaining Te. It would hurt your head, and generally speaking you'd seek to avoid it!

I for example, avoid Ti like the plague it is. I do none of the 10 points barring point 9.



Maybe it is Fi, but when sorting out my own feelings (once I've dealt with them in a 'feely' way), I analyze, categorize, systematize them as being relevant, valid, considering outside influences, plugging them into what I've learned about myself and how that affects the rest, much like a puzzle you're completing, and then testing it before I accept it to work. I dunno, is that Te and Ne then? I'm not able to do this anywhere else in my life though, I admit.
 

BlueScreen

Fail 2.0
Joined
Nov 8, 2008
Messages
2,668
MBTI Type
YMCA
You check for truth, consistency, and integrity. It is pretty different to stepping back and fitting them in logical frameworks. I think it's Ne and Fi driven. Ne because it's interacting with the massive web we call reality, and Fi because of that drive for integrity. It's all about consequences and stuff for me, not rigid logical models of feeling. I develop psychological models for entertainment, but they look nothing like anything you could publish in a science journal. Far more abstract, and more a key to visualisation of the concept rather than a complete system.

I think this is where our mistake is here. Ti has a reverence to structured, solid, scientific modelling of the system above all else; even the thinking used to approach it is rigidly structured and logical. By comparison, we make a model of the system and like it to be optimised and logically consistent. The two things are worlds apart.
 

Moiety

New member
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Messages
5,996
MBTI Type
ISFJ
Ti 1 : I organize data and ideas into a logical internal framework or sets of categories. 1
Ti 2 : I seek data to fill holes in my models, frameworks, blueprints and logical taxonomies. 1
Ti 3: I use my inner understanding of how ideas and things logically fit together to help me understand how things work. 5
Ti 4: I modify models and frameworks to accommodate new data, thereby preserving inner logical consistency. 5
Ti 5: I seek precision in my use of words and in my internal models, frameworks, and blueprints. 2
Ti 6: I logically prioritize categories and components of models in terms of the needs of the situation 2
Ti 7: I restructure my priorities based upon my category profiles 0
Ti 8: I make decisions based on my category profiles 2
Ti 9: I seek logical consistency in my life 4
Ti 10: I use precise language to try and get the world to understand logical conceptual models and/or blueprints 4 (funny, I'm not as worried with wording in english, but I am in portuguese, my mother tongue)


I do use Ti quite a lot. After Ne and Fi, there's no doubt it is my strongest function and accounts for many XNTP test results. Fi is much too fundamentally ingrained to be easily beaten though.


You check for truth, consistency, and integrity. It is pretty different to stepping back and fitting them in logical frameworks. I think it's Ne and Fi driven. Ne because it's interacting with the massive web we call reality, and Fi because of that drive for integrity. It's all about consequences and stuff for me, not rigid logical models of feeling. I develop psychological models for entertainment, but they look nothing like anything you could publish in a science journal. Far more abstract, and more a key to visualisation of the concept rather than a complete system.

I think this is where our mistake is here. Ti has a reverence to structured, solid, scientific modelling of the system above all else; even the thinking used to approach it is rigidly structured and logical. By comparison, we make a model of the system and like it to be optimised and logically consistent. The two things are worlds apart.

Well, I think the core of it can be pretty subconscious. I sure don't think Fi helps with mathematics or science in general that much.
 

BlueScreen

Fail 2.0
Joined
Nov 8, 2008
Messages
2,668
MBTI Type
YMCA
I do use Ti quite a lot. After Ne and Fi, there's no doubt it is my strongest function and accounts for many XNTP test results. Fi is much too fundamentally ingrained to be easily beaten though.


Well, I think the core of it can be pretty subconscious. I sure don't think Fi helps with mathematics or science in general that much.

I just know I don't have it. My INTP father teaching an ENTP something is a so much more smooth process than him teaching me something. I couldn't care less what frameworks I should be adhering to :). Though I'm normally happy later that he beat it in.

I develop practical solutions quicker, and do many other things quicker, but if I had to make a complete logical framework to describe something without taking shortcuts, without just leaving it at what was needed to see it rather than a full description, I would go nuts in the process.

One thing MBTi has helped me with is seeing my limitations. I can still create a perfect framework, just not in a Ti sense of working through it carefully and structuring it. I have to visualise the whole system then draw it. And bounce ideas off people to break intuitive deadlocks. It's the strength and the weakness of Ne Te, we kill in the perceptive domain, but we have to move all science problems into it to be good at them. I don't have the internal sit and ponder logical details that the INTP has. I philosophy existence and stuff instead :).
 

Moiety

New member
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Messages
5,996
MBTI Type
ISFJ
I just know I don't have it. My INTP father teaching an ENTP something is a so much more smooth process than him teaching me something. I couldn't care less what frameworks I should be adhering to :). Though I'm normally happy later that he beat it in.

I develop practical solutions quicker, and do many other things quicker, but if I had to make a complete logical framework to describe something without taking shortcuts, without just leaving it at what was needed to see it rather than a full description, I would go nuts in the process.

One thing MBTi has helped me with is seeing my limitations. I can still create a perfect framework, just not in a Ti sense of working through it carefully and structuring it. I have to visualise the whole system then draw it. And bounce ideas off people to break intuitive deadlocks. It's the strength and the weakness of Ne Te, we kill in the perceptive domain, but we have to move all science problems into it to be good at them. I don't have the internal sit and ponder details that the INTP has. I philosophy existence and stuff instead :).

Well I know my Te is pretty limited.

I do see what you mean, and I do agree that it's not something I could always describe too well...framework sure sounds more like Te then Ti. I see Ti as "if then else" basically :tongue: Only, in parallel with other cases at the same time and at higher speeds. Checking for consistency. I sure would prefer not to write it all down, but that's because it often just 'clicks' in my mind.

I know that, if there was a (better) list of every Ti trait, I wouldn't possess them all, but I think I'd relate to most of them to some degree unlike with other functions like Si or Te or Ni.

The minute we start talking about functions is the minute I'm more than sure a spectrum is needed to consider all cases. There are just too many subtleties, too many people who don't obey to a given type's function order.
 

The Outsider

New member
Joined
Feb 3, 2009
Messages
2,418
MBTI Type
intp
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx
Ti 1: I organize data and ideas into a logical internal framework or sets of categories. [0]
Ti 2: I seek data to fill holes in my models, frameworks, blueprints and logical taxonomies [1]
Ti 3: I use my inner understanding of how ideas and things logically fit together to help me understand how things work [3]
Ti 4: I modify models and frameworks to accommodate new data, thereby preserving inner logical consistency [0]
Ti 5: I seek precision in my use of words and in my internal models, frameworks, and blueprints [0]
Ti 6: I logically prioritize categories and components of models in terms of the needs of the situation [1]
Ti 7: I restructure my priorities based upon my category profiles [1]
Ti 8: I make decisions based on my category profiles [1]
Ti 9: I seek logical consistency in my life [0]
Ti 10: I use precise language to try and get the world to understand logical conceptual models and/or blueprints [2]

9
Apparently, Ti is a lot more complex than I would have guessed. I don't even understand half of that stuff. :doh:
 

BlueScreen

Fail 2.0
Joined
Nov 8, 2008
Messages
2,668
MBTI Type
YMCA
Well I know my Te is pretty limited.

I do see what you mean, and I do agree that it's not something I could always describe too well...framework sure sounds more like Te then Ti. I see Ti as "if then else" basically :tongue: Only, in parallel with other cases at the same time and at higher speeds. Checking for consistency. I sure would prefer not to write it all down, but that's because it often just 'clicks' in my mind.

I know that, if there was a (better) list of every Ti trait, I wouldn't possess them all, but I think I'd relate to most of them to some degree unlike with other functions like Si or Te or Ni.

The minute we start talking about functions is the minute I'm more than sure a spectrum is needed to consider all cases. There are just too many subtleties, too many people who don't obey to a given type's function order.

Yeh, I know I only got the Te stuff in the last few years, and it is a big change. I look at business systems, feel managerial :). But I was always good at logical and maths problems. Maybe Ne visualisation is enough on its own. If you read the Ti questions carefully, do you really do all the structuring and frameworks stuff, or just see the systems and the answer? (We are a visionary type, and our perception and visualisation of problems is pretty damn good.)
 

Moiety

New member
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Messages
5,996
MBTI Type
ISFJ
Well, when forced to use pen and paper I do organize my thoughts somewhat, but yes it's partly subconscious which is what I was referring to. I just now I can often explain my reasoning in a very elementary/fundamental manner. A -> B -> C. And I do often bear it mind when formulating a solution.

The questions themselves, are poorly worded I think. When I use my value system I don't always go into detail WHY I think that why, but if someone asked me, I could. I think the same logic applies to Ti.

For example : "I modify models and frameworks to accommodate new data, thereby preserving inner logical consistency". Yes, I look at the word model and framework and raise my eyebrow a bit...but at a subconscious level I think that is exactly what happens. I always incorporate new found knowledge into the grand scheme of logical consistency. "F = m*a is always true". Well...it's not always precise, but you can use it safely 99% of the time. You learn about quantum physics. You incorporate that into your "framework" I guess, and relativize the validity of everything you knew before. So I guess I always strive for that consistency, but I also know that one must balance things out depending on whom we are discussing whatever topic we are discussing.

I hope that partially answered your question :) I know what you are hinting at...but I don't believe everyone uses a bit of each function so it's only logical that some use A or B, more that others...while still saying nothing about preference. Ti is not my preference. But I do use it, I think.
 

sculpting

New member
Joined
Jan 28, 2009
Messages
4,148
I do see what you mean, and I do agree that it's not something I could always describe too well...framework sure sounds more like Te then Ti. I see Ti as "if then else" basically :tongue: Only, in parallel with other cases at the same time and at higher speeds. Checking for consistency. I sure would prefer not to write it all down, but that's because it often just 'clicks' in my mind.

I know that, if there was a (better) list of every Ti trait, I wouldn't possess them all, but I think I'd relate to most of them to some degree unlike with other functions like Si or Te or Ni..

When considering if you use Ti or not, rather than thinking of it more in isolation the way an INTP would, think of how an ENTP would use it. Ne first then Ti second.

I really, really want to get a better understanding of what happens as they Ne-Ti problems, becuase I dont think it is the clean Ti the INTPs love.

I would guess Ti becomes more willing to "remodel" while building, if being used with Ne, and thus is less rigid and linear, until the model is fully defined. Totally a guess on my end though.

When I feel like I am using Ti, it is like it takes turns with Fi. They toss the idea back and forth and pick at it from different angles. First Ne connects based upon what Fi is interested in-mostly people. Then Ti gets pulled into to develop a framework, poke holes, and find flaws-and most especially find ways to test to confirm. If this than this, If that than that. It is not easy though and I can feel whole chuncks of brain come online. I find I look for chances to use it, as it is fun in a painful way.

The minute we start talking about functions is the minute I'm more than sure a spectrum is needed to consider all cases. There are just too many subtleties, too many people who don't obey to a given type's function order.

I am a big fan of the functions myself and most people seem to follow the order okay. You can kinda see how most folks seem to have the first two functions pretty well defined, but then as they get older all those others start to pop up as they "work" on them. I see lots who follow the "overuse" of the tertiary function model.

Neat though, a dominant function vs an aux vs a tert function can be so different in how they present themselves that they almost deserve a seperate consideration. Ti dom is nothing thing whatever Ti we use for instance. (could all be Ne BS though :) )
 

Kalach

Filthy Apes!
Joined
Dec 3, 2008
Messages
4,310
MBTI Type
INTJ
Maybe it is Fi, but when sorting out my own feelings (once I've dealt with them in a 'feely' way), I analyze, categorize, systematize them as being relevant, valid, considering outside influences, plugging them into what I've learned about myself and how that affects the rest, much like a puzzle you're completing, and then testing it before I accept it to work. I dunno, is that Te and Ne then?

Nup. That's an outstanding description of Fi (with a little Te in the tail). So asserts I.

I humbly submit that you guys being, via Fi processing, intimately familiar with this type of analysis, it would make it easier to see that style of reasoning "out there", and perhaps even mimic it for T, except perhaps that you'd be describing the connections you saw rather than actually doing the Ti.

I just made that up.
 

Udog

Seriously Delirious
Joined
Aug 2, 2008
Messages
5,290
MBTI Type
INfp
Enneagram
9w1
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
This was tricky, because I do this stuff with motivations and feelings all the time. In answering this, I had a hard time separating the two.

2 Ti 1: I organize data and ideas into a logical internal framework or sets of categories. How can I make sense of a thing unless I put it in a proper context?
3 Ti 2: I seek data to fill holes in my models, frameworks, blueprints and logical taxonomies. I hate missing gaps in my knowledge spectrum.
2 Ti 3: I use my inner understanding of how ideas and things logically fit together to help me understand how things work. I'll do this out of necessity, and I find it's necessary frequently. It doesn't mean it's natural to me.
2 Ti 4: I modify models and frameworks to accommodate new data, thereby preserving inner logical consistency I'd do this more, but it's a bit of a blow everytime I find out I'm flat out wrong in something. Rewarding, but exhausting.
1 Ti 5: I seek precision in my use of words and in my internal models, frameworks, and blueprints. Sadly, I'm all too happy to let good enough alone here, which can make my models sloppy unless I'm challenged to refine them.
0 Ti 6: I logically prioritize categories and components of models in terms of the needs of the situation. I'm bending my mind in weird ways trying to understand this, so I give myself a 0.
2 Ti 7: I restructure my priorities based upon my category profiles See Ti 8.
1 Ti 8: I make decisions based on my category profiles. I challenge myself by coming up with the best 'logical' course of action. However, I then use that to feed Fi to make the call, otherwise I quickly become miserable.
1 Ti 9: I seek logical consistency in my life Honestly, not so much. I very much value it, though.
1 Ti 10: I use precise language to try and get the world to understand logical conceptual models and/or blueprints. Very difficult. I can spend 10 minutes writing a post and 20 minutes trying to pull out the essence and eliminate verbiage, and still fail.

Score = 15
 
Last edited:

OrangeAppled

Sugar Hiccup
Joined
Mar 20, 2009
Messages
7,626
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
This was tricky, because I do this stuff with motivations and feelings all the time. In answering this, I had a hard time separating the two.

Exactly. I do all of that (to an extent) as well, it is simply not fully separated from my feeling. The process sounds similar, it's just less detached.
 

Polaris

AKA Nunki
Joined
Apr 7, 2009
Messages
2,529
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
451
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
2 -- Ti: I organize data and ideas into a logical internal framework or sets of categories.

3 (if seeking internal data counts) -- Ti: I seek data to fill holes in my models, frameworks, blueprints and logical taxonomies

4 -- Ti: I use my inner understanding of how ideas and things logically fit together to help me understand how things work

2 -- Ti: I modify models and frameworks to accommodate new data, thereby preserving inner logical consistency

3 -- Ti: I seek precision in my use of words and in my internal models, frameworks, and blueprints

2 -- Ti: I logically prioritize categories and components of models in terms of the needs of the situation

1 -- Ti: I restructure my priorities based upon my category profiles

2 -- Ti: I make decisions based on my category profiles

3 -- Ti: I seek logical consistency in my life

3 -- Ti: I use precise language to try and get the world to understand logical conceptual models and/or blueprints

Ti comes fairly naturally to me, but I have a chaotic inner world and Ti is the servant of Fi.
 

Udog

Seriously Delirious
Joined
Aug 2, 2008
Messages
5,290
MBTI Type
INfp
Enneagram
9w1
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Exactly. I do all of that (to an extent) as well, it is simply not fully separated from my feeling. The process sounds similar, it's just less detached.

Yeah, like I have all sorts of models when it comes to motivations, and they are constantly being molded to the situation, shifted, and applied. But when it comes to purely logical constructs... yeah, not so much.
 
Top