• 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.

Pretentious [add in any other negative adjective] Ti

William K

Uniqueorn
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
986
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Point out the contradiction/inconsistency in the logical process, and/or or challenge the premise in the first place by giving proof counter to it.

Ok, perhaps I need to rephrase the question :)

Is there anything that doesn't involve 100% correctly proven logic/T that can change your mind? Can an Fi-user such as an INFP convince you using fuzzy Fi-statements? Or failing that, what will it take to convince you that "Ok, the other person might not think like I do and I don't agree with him 100%, but his way of thinking may also be valid"
 

Qre:us

New member
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
4,890
Ok, perhaps I need to rephrase the question :)

Is there anything that doesn't involve 100% correctly proven logic/T that can change your mind? Can an Fi-user such as an INFP convince you using fuzzy Fi-statements? Or failing that, what will it take to convince you that "Ok, the other person might not think like I do and I don't agree with him 100%, but his way of thinking may also be valid"

This gets tricky.....

My mother is INFP and I have this term that I see in her, the "moral rational". So, it truly depends on the nature of the subject. She has far greater chance of convincing me of her position even if it is "fuzzy logic" if the topic in question is a question of morality. It appeals to my Fe.

There are vast subjects up for discouse that goes beyond logic, where the detached, clinical process of logic does not apply, and it is more of an argument of compassion/morality...in this, I can, and do, definitely sway.

However, the presentation of it has to follow a somewhat step-by-step justification, "morally rational" in bent.......not just skipping to "well, cuz it's right".:D Rationalize, using morality, why it is right. Speak to the consequence to the character of my being, given what you propose.
 

yenom

Alexander the Terrible
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Messages
1,755
Ti is like that sharp knife that cuts through bullshit, and makes everything clear. :yes:
 

the state i am in

Active member
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
2,475
MBTI Type
infj
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
This gets tricky.....

My mother is INFP and I have this term that I see in her, the "moral rational". So, it truly depends on the nature of the subject. She has far greater chance of convincing me of her position even if it is "fuzzy logic" if the topic in question is a question of morality. It appeals to my Fe.

There are vast subjects up for discouse that goes beyond logic, where the detached, clinical process of logic does not apply, and it is more of an argument of compassion/morality...in this, I can, and do, definitely sway.

However, the presentation of it has to follow a somewhat step-by-step justification, "morally rational" in bent.......not just skipping to "well, cuz it's right".:D Rationalize, using morality, why it is right. Speak to the consequence to the character of my being, given what you propose.

Fi (or Ti for that matter) still has to find a way to show what it sees. this is Ne. paint me a picture, it doesn't have to follow a formal organization, let me rebuild bits and pieces of that (and fill in the gaps along the way). but if your VISION is compelling, if i feel as if you are perceptive and have a complex way of seeing the situation that has an internal coherency, logic, organization, consistency, etc, then i will be like, yes! i see what you mean! and at that point, i can ask questions to get closer and closer, clarify whatever is unclear.

but if it's just this, see, your wrong (sic), then i'm like, seriously? fucking pull it together, why am i interested in what you are saying? why does it contribute anything to my understanding? why do i give empty words the benefit of the doubt. why does your poorly formed product stand up to mine and nullify it (it doesn't). communication is the same as art. if you put out a shitty product that is poorly articulated, why would i listen to your songs? what do they contribute? what value do they have? how testable is your hypothesis? what kind of experience does it elicit from me when it is made up of nothing, has no landmarks, has nothing to explore or consider or PERCEIVE. it doesn't get my attention, and it doesn't do anything with my awareness once it has it in its grasp.

also, if you never do learn to contribute these things, if you never learn to communicate, if you end up being a single-function kamikaze, then something's failed, some part of the process has failed. wasted potential.

this happens all over the place. and sometimes their stories intrigue us and are tragic and beautiful and sometimes they're documented. they grab our attention. they're beautiful bc we see the whole story and they make sense to us, and they cannot solve a very difficult problem that we can recognize and also find threatening. they teach us what we need to figure out, not provide an example of how we too should go up in smoke.
 

the state i am in

Active member
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
2,475
MBTI Type
infj
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
If I may interject a hair-splitting question here I already wanted to ask in the Fi-thread:

Is "pretentious" really the right word, or shouldn't it rather be presumptuos?
My premise is that pretentiousness denotes a certain kind of (obnoxious) behaviour while presumption rather refers to a kind of judgment, i.e. to overestimate one's own capabilities, and which isn't necessarily outwardly directed (as is pretentiousness).

I'm not a native speaker of English, but I think there is a slight but important difference.

how about, it is presumptuous to think that one function contains or has access to the whole truth. so those that get super jacked up on one function and never allow for any feedback, who turn there one function awareness into an absolutist stance, are not only presumptuous but asinine.

one function may contain your highest learned or instinctual awareness, but it is completely and utterly dependent upon the other functions to develop that, refine that, revise that, re-sketch, etc. they provide parameters, boundaries, and tensions that focus said function, that hold it into place, adjusting it to make sure it is perfectly in tune.
 

simulatedworld

Freshman Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2008
Messages
5,552
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Usually, no...something about Ne and Ti in that order that leads to some pretty boorish behavior among some ENTPs at some times. It's not Ne per se...

It's Fe misusing its awareness of how to emotionally affect people misguided by Ne's incessant curiosity about what will happen when we push the next button.
 

Poki

New member
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
10,436
MBTI Type
STP
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
I actually see pretentious more in the EP types as opposed to the IP types. It appears it is when an EP gets out of Ti and Fi and tries to teach/convince/explain their point of view. When an IP type gets more info they tend to first get back in and analyze where an EP type tends to get stuck in Extraverted mode.

I know I will get slammed, but its just something I noticed recently.
 

Siúil a Rúin

when the colors fade
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
14,037
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
496
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Ti people can be so pretentious sometimes by acting like they totally have the monopoly on thought and that everyone else probably isn't that bright and probably sits in the forest singing to the woodland creatures or something! :yes:
I have actually done that. :newwink:
 

Kaveri

New member
Joined
Aug 18, 2007
Messages
183
MBTI Type
intp
Ti people can be so pretentious sometimes by acting like they totally have the monopoly on thought and that everyone else probably isn't that bright and probably sits in the forest singing to the woodland creatures or something!

Why, singing to woodland creatures is a billion times more constructive than trying to control everything. Which is what logic-driven people often seem to do.
 

William K

Uniqueorn
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
986
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
This gets tricky.....

My mother is INFP and I have this term that I see in her, the "moral rational". So, it truly depends on the nature of the subject. She has far greater chance of convincing me of her position even if it is "fuzzy logic" if the topic in question is a question of morality. It appeals to my Fe.

There are vast subjects up for discouse that goes beyond logic, where the detached, clinical process of logic does not apply, and it is more of an argument of compassion/morality...in this, I can, and do, definitely sway.

However, the presentation of it has to follow a somewhat step-by-step justification, "morally rational" in bent.......not just skipping to "well, cuz it's right".:D Rationalize, using morality, why it is right. Speak to the consequence to the character of my being, given what you propose.

Ok, that sounds fair. Now, one (final?) question. How much do you relax this standard when on a discussion forum on the Internet like this one? The reason I ask is that if (as an INFP) I am to engage in a fruitful discussion with a Ti-dom/aux, I need to know what the baseline requirements are. Most of you guys can just argue for the sake of arguing, because that is one way of validating your logic ( And I have my suspicions that a couple of you even enjoy it :) ) Sadly, I don't work the same way and if I figure I can't possibly 'win', I'll just shrink back into my shell and refuse to play.

Side note : Where are the rest of the Ti-users? I appreciate your answers Qre:us, but surely not everyone's Ti is the same way, is it?
 

CrystalViolet

lab rat extraordinaire
Joined
Oct 24, 2008
Messages
2,152
MBTI Type
XNFP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I'm confessing that I don't understand Ti, as well as I understand the other functions, so a really good definition or description of Ti would be good.
 

BlueGray

New member
Joined
Oct 7, 2009
Messages
474
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5
Ok, that sounds fair. Now, one (final?) question. How much do you relax this standard when on a discussion forum on the Internet like this one? The reason I ask is that if (as an INFP) I am to engage in a fruitful discussion with a Ti-dom/aux, I need to know what the baseline requirements are. Most of you guys can just argue for the sake of arguing, because that is one way of validating your logic ( And I have my suspicions that a couple of you even enjoy it :) ) Sadly, I don't work the same way and if I figure I can't possibly 'win', I'll just shrink back into my shell and refuse to play.

Side note : Where are the rest of the Ti-users? I appreciate your answers Qre:us, but surely not everyone's Ti is the same way, is it?

Sounds a lot like my infp friend. He backs down from arguments too quickly for my tastes. I will admit that I enjoy arguing though. There is just so much clarification, testing, and learning to be had from constructive argument. I don't really "relax" my standards. I have different standards based on whether the discussion is about individual viewpoints or about some objective "truth", though.

Fiery, this has what I consider a very good function by function description of INTPs. The Ti description could help you. An INTP Profile
 

NTufnel

New member
Joined
Jan 10, 2010
Messages
3
Ti is pretentious because of the pretense of truth behind the decisions. Fi and Ti are both used to advocate gut feelings, but Ti attempts to justify them with logic. Ti rarely has incorrect logic, but fails to examine the assumptions on which the conclusions are based. An analogy may be that it fixes the foundation so it can build, but the foundation isn't always true, it just has to be somewhere or Ti quickly gets bogged down in endless calculations.

Additionally, the scope of the logic Ti uses to justify an opinion may not be as powerful as the xxTP seems to imply. Since their logic is often correct, the Ti user will often not change their beliefs until given a Ti reason, failing to correctly interpret the significance of other types' arguments because they are not structured in a way they can readily interpret.

Forcing others to play to your strengths and debate your opinion with your syntax is a failing of any function. Ti and Fi in particular reaffirm their own validity to the user, closing their mind to other possibilities because they perceive themselves as logical (or whatever Fi's version of self-affirmation is....just "right"?).

In the case of Ti, the "problem" is often that the user will try to draw incredibly precise conclusions from a set of assumptions that are not nearly as accurate as needed to make such conclusions. Ti tends to debate the finer points, whether or not it knows its in the ballpark, so to speak.


Lastly, Ti is perceived as pretentious because you dont understand it.
 

entropie

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 24, 2008
Messages
16,767
MBTI Type
entp
Enneagram
783
Ti people can be so pretentious sometimes by acting like they totally have the monopoly on thought and that everyone else probably isn't that bright and probably sits in the forest singing to the woodland creatures or something!

Acting ? For that kind of attitude you need real dedication :)
 

incubustribute

New member
Joined
Oct 4, 2009
Messages
297
MBTI Type
ISFJ
Ti is pretentious because of the pretense of truth behind the decisions. Fi and Ti are both used to advocate gut feelings, but Ti attempts to justify them with logic. Ti rarely has incorrect logic, but fails to examine the assumptions on which the conclusions are based. An analogy may be that it fixes the foundation so it can build, but the foundation isn't always true, it just has to be somewhere or Ti quickly gets bogged down in endless calculations.

I had this conversation with an ENTP friend of mine, and it's interesting that you bring it up. I think if you take any Ti user back far enough by asking "why" repeatedly, you'll find that the most basic assumptions are always made arbitrarily. You can only take logic back so far in this crazy world we live in, and I think if you get too carried away, the line of distinction between Ti and Fi becomes blurred. We all have to assume certain premises to get anything done, otherwise we become frustrated and lost in infinite regress. I think the mistake Ti users make is to say that Fi is necessarily always illogical. If you can make the case that helping others or responding to emotional needs is an acceptable or good thing to do, than Fi's general value system checks out on logical consistency.
 

entropie

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 24, 2008
Messages
16,767
MBTI Type
entp
Enneagram
783
I had this conversation with an ENTP friend of mine, and it's interesting that you bring it up. I think if you take any Ti user back far enough by asking "why" repeatedly, you'll find that the most basic assumptions are always made arbitrarily.

Seems like you havent met a Ne master yet
 

Tamske

Writing...
Joined
Oct 22, 2009
Messages
1,764
MBTI Type
ENTP
I had this conversation with an ENTP friend of mine, and it's interesting that you bring it up. I think if you take any Ti user back far enough by asking "why" repeatedly, you'll find that the most basic assumptions are always made arbitrarily.
Of course, and that's not even inconsistent! I've actually talked about it with my students yesterday. The lesson was about axioms in probability theory.
Student: "So, those axioms are chosen arbitrarily? If I choose other axioms, I can make everything true that I want to?"
Me: "Sure. You can make a mathematics based on the axiom that all numbers are equal to each other. This could be consistent, but you can't do anything with that sort of mathematics. These axioms are chosen in the way that probability theory DOES say something about probabilities. They are chosen such that the probability of throwing a six with a fair die is one out of six - such that it gives the same results as our intuitive understanding"
(intuitive not in the N meaning of the word, of course)
Me, thinking: "Ti makes consistent theories, but you need Te too to make useful ones!"

Another way of pretentious Ti (or, more general, T vs F)
- seeing "subjective" as an insult.
- in the same vein: if someone else chooses subjectively where you wouldn't(*), you're superior to them, of course... even if it doesn't matter that much.
(*) There are problems that can be solved either way - the fact that I'd rather use logic on them makes me a T. It doesn't make me better.
 
Top