How do you use Ti?

[The Great One]

Ti users, explain to me how you use Introverted thinking.

 

[Cellmold]

As a way of putting the needle in the haystack, taking it out again, pointing it out to everyone and then bending it into a different shape.

 

[JocktheMotie]

 

[Mal12345]

That was cool!

A video suggestion came up afterward which explains Ti Vs. Te.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=kRtX65Cnc9w

 

[Nicodemus]

That was cool!

A video suggestion came up afterward which explains Ti Vs. Te.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=kRtX65Cnc9w

And here you can talk about it, even with the author.

 

[Mal12345]

Here's a video suggestion that came up after the Ti vs. Te video:

On INTPs:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=b0H72NI40Ac

 

[Doctorjuice]

That was cool!

A video suggestion came up afterward which explains Ti Vs. Te.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=kRtX65Cnc9w

I approve of this post

Ti users, explain to me how you use Introverted thinking.

There's a sort of internal sense of when something is inconsistent or when there is a logical contradiction, also an internal sense of when something is congruent or incongruent with a system (or previous experiences). I go into my head, detach, and try to look at things objectively.

 

[Mal12345]

I approve of this post



There's a sort of internal sense of when something is inconsistent or when there is a logical contradiction, also an internal sense of when something is congruent or incongruent with a system (or previous experiences). I go into my head, detach, and try to look at things objectively.

Hey Doc,

Either my memory is going or I missed out on your original posting of that video here. Probably the former. One thing that always comes up lacking in these kinds of analyses is the emotional aspect of the INTP thought-process. This might include the ISTP's, where the ISTP is into concrete systems and the INTP is into intellectual systems. But to me there is a certain beauty to systems, most particularly the mathematical. The idea of "Analysis" misses half, and perhaps the most important, part of it. Comprehension of systems is more immediate than analysis, and it is accompanied by an immediate experience of truth that can sometimes be overwhelmingly emotional. Analysis is emphasized over synthesis, but this is understandable as synthesis is harder to describe. I agree that analysis is an objective process, and truth has objective content; moreover, I agree that objectivity is absolutely desirable. However, the manner of arriving at objective truth is not analytical, it is synthetic; it is more than the sum of its parts. The truth behind this mysterious process of obtaining truth is partially emotional. I wouldn't say that emotion drives this process so much as accompanies and even rewards it. And despite the idea that objectivity is the goal, there is a certain subjectivity that goes into the process. This is the point of indefinable mystery that is not what some would call Ni but is instead the basis for all that is Ti.

 

[Doctorjuice]

Hey Doc,

Either my memory is going or I missed out on your original posting of that video here. Probably the former. One thing that always comes up lacking in these kinds of analyses is the emotional aspect of the INTP thought-process. This might include the ISTP's, where the ISTP is into concrete systems and the INTP is into intellectual systems. But to me there is a certain beauty to systems, most particularly the mathematical. The idea of "Analysis" misses half, and perhaps the most important, part of it. Comprehension of systems is more immediate than analysis, and it is accompanied by an immediate experience of truth that can sometimes be overwhelmingly emotional. Analysis is emphasized over synthesis, but this is understandable as synthesis is harder to describe. I agree that analysis is an objective process, and truth has objective content; moreover, I agree that objectivity is absolutely desirable. However, the manner of arriving at objective truth is not analytical, it is synthetic; it is more than the sum of its parts. The truth behind this mysterious process of obtaining truth is partially emotional. I wouldn't say that emotion drives this process so much as accompanies and even rewards it. And despite the idea that objectivity is the goal, there is a certain subjectivity that goes into the process. This is the point of indefinable mystery that is not what some would call Ni but is instead the basis for all that is Ti.

You know, this somewhat relates to my theory that in order to use one function you must also be using the opposite of it to some degree. So to use Ti you must also use Fe and vice versa. You can't perceive the patterns behind the details (Ni) unless you observe the outside appearance to some degree (Se).

Just a theory I play around with in my head.

 

[The Great One]

What aspect of that demonstrated introverted thinking? How he was getting philosophical with everything or because he took the vehicle apart, broke it into pieces, and put it back together again?

 

[redacted]

I took some acid last weekend and was thinking a lot about how thinking works.

It seems obvious that everyone has tens of thousand implicit beliefs about things, and that those beliefs relate to each other in some sort of structure. The way I see it -- learning is a process of relating small units of belief to each other and creating larger units. Since our consciousness can only really deal with around 7 propositions (or units) at a time, larger units are more efficient in that they carry more information but also more risky because the internal mechanics are taken for granted.

We can think of someone's overall system of beliefs as a "ground level", where a bunch of unrelated primitive beliefs sit, a "first level", where primitive beliefs are grouped together into very basic theories, and then hundreds of other levels that grow to staggering heights of abstraction. Scaffolding on top of scaffolding on top of scaffolding, etc. Consciousness is basically a continuous conference call between 7 people at a time sitting on different places in the scaffolding.

Back to MBTI, the role of perceiving functions is to add new people to the conversation. Sensing will constantly add in guys sitting on the sensory input scaffolding. (Just like all beliefs, sensory beliefs build up from little units like everything else -- from primitives at the bottom like "this spot on my retina is currently being hit with light" to "i see a cat".) Intuition is constantly building bridges between places in the scaffolding and adding the guys standing on those bridges to the conversation.

The conversation itself is mediated by Thinking and Feeling, which gauge what each member brings to the conversation. If the member isn't relevant, they'll just be replaced with a new member from the Intuition/Sensation queue. If the member is judged more harshly, Thinking/Feeling will tear down the levels of scaffolding that created that person in the first place. Likewise, if they're judged favorably, Thinking/Feeling will give give them a louder voice for the next conversation they're a part of.

Over time, the scaffolding gets higher and higher and more and more interconnected due to the work of Intuition/Sensing. It also gets more and more specialized because Thinking/Feeling have torn down areas of the structure that haven't been good in the conversation in the past.

Anyway, in this narrative, the role my Ti plays in my thinking is that it's just sitting there monitoring what I'm thinking about (the conversation) and either saying "that guy isn't contributing" or "you guys need to listen to this guy". Since I'm an Ni dom and I'm more focused on creating bridges between spots in the scaffolding and throwing those guys into the conversation, my Ti spends much of its time knocking these bridges down.

Sorry if that made no sense.

 

[Mal12345]

That makes sense. It doesn't describe Ti-dom, and I surmise that this is implied in the OP.

At a certain level of the scaffolding, Ti acts as nothing more than a defense mechanism. And since it has its own set of defense mechanism "fingerprints," anybody using one of those mechanisms is implicitly using Ti. One of those mechanisms is Intellectualization. Another is Compartmentalization. And of course there is good old Rationalization.

 

[Mal12345]

What aspect of that demonstrated introverted thinking? How he was getting philosophical with everything or because he took the vehicle apart, broke it into pieces, and put it back together again?

The vid seems more ISTP, which is still Ti-dom.

 

[RaptorWizard]

Ti is simple. You think about stuff.

 

[Mal12345]

Ti is simple. You think about stuff.

Everybody thinks!

 

[RaptorWizard]

Everybody thinks!

I think I like your new avatar and I think you should keep it and I think I think more than most people think because I think Ti people think a lot more than most other people think.

 

[Mal12345]

I think I like your new avatar and I think you should keep it and I think I think more than most people think because I think Ti people think a lot more than most other people think.

I don't think that's necessarily the case.

 

[The Great One]

The vid seems more ISTP, which is still Ti-dom.

Which makes sense. I think that Ne<Ti and Se<Ti users, use the function in very different ways. For instance, my old ESTP boss used to be able to solve problems in the moment and just take action. He would always say that i over-complicated things, and that I put too much thought into things. He thought that I need to do less analyzing and take more action. This is why I didn't think I was a Ti user in the first place. However, I could solve problems and think of better ways to do things, it's just that it didn't happen in the moment like him. Mine was more like mini-visions that would just come to me when I was alone and do one was around. Out of no where, I would be thinking of something, and then another idea would spawn from it, and I would get this "Eureka" moment. Yeah, it's like I couldn't choose when these things would happen, they would just hit me out of nowhere. It was very similar to Gregory House actually.

 

[Mal12345]

Which makes sense. I think that Ne<Ti and Se<Ti users, use the function in very different ways. For instance, my old ESTP boss used to be able to solve problems in the moment and just take action. He would always say that i over-complicated things, and that I put too much thought into things. He thought that I need to do less analyzing and take more action. This is why I didn't think I was a Ti user in the first place. However, I could solve problems and think of better ways to do things, it's just that it didn't happen in the moment like him. Mine was more like mini-visions that would just come to me when I was alone and do one was around. Out of no where, I would be thinking of something, and then another idea would spawn from it, and I would get this "Eureka" moment. Yeah, it's like I couldn't choose when these things would happen, they would just hit me out of nowhere. It was very similar to Gregory House actually.

So what I described previously was Ne not Ti.

 

[The Great One]

So what I described previously was Ne not Ti.

I don't understand what you are saying. Please clarify.