[Te] TJs: Describe Te as You Understand It

[violet_crown]

What Te and Fe need to understand is that they are essentially the same, only with a different focus (the impersonal vs the personal).

It's not the same thing. People aren't things or objects. Viewing them as such is a huge difference to me.

 

[Kullervo]

It's not the same thing. People aren't things or objects. Viewing them as such is a huge difference to me.

No, but Fe makes sense of them, morals, feelings in a similar way to how Te does with systems and ideas. They are both Extroverted Judging functions, so have the same orientation but a different focus.

Look at the strongest Fe users around the forum, the doms/dommes They have a very strong sense of "good" and "bad" individual people, groups of people and systems of belief (e.g. politics) and social behaviours. Fi can do this too, but tends to see everyone as individuals and is averse to making a generalisation - this would offend the Fi value system.

You are lumped in the "right/good" or "wrong/bad" box based on evidence in the world (what the Fe user responds to around them, the moods, feelings, impressions).

 

[ceecee]

It's not the same thing. People aren't things or objects. Viewing them as such is a huge difference to me.

Agreed and while you won't hear a vehement disagreement from me, an Fe dom could potentially lose their shit over the comparison.

 

[Virtual ghost]

My impression is that INTJs take some sort of approach where they don't make the same basic assumption that I do that they'll have to achieve whatever it is by themselves essentially on brute force. It feels like they're willing to leverage the "terrain" that exists between them and wherever they're trying to get to to make their goal happen. Ni-led Te just seems a lot more zen like altogether lol.

Another question I have about aux-Te is that there seems to be a difference in activation energy with you guys. Like that cost/benefit analysis and subsequent planning phase seems much more extended than it does for ETJs. For us, I'd say it's because we use our Pe relief function kind of like a melee weapon. In other words, I plan just to the point where I'm within range to handle a situation on the fly should everything fall to shit. I'll arrange things to avoid losses that are utterly unacceptable, but once things are where I'm back within range of my risk tolerance I'll just go for it lol.


I'd love to hear thoughts on differences re: planning approaches from the Te-aux crowd at well.

Well, for going into depth with this we need to explain dom Ni in detail and that is story for itself.


The trick is that most of INTJs are enneagram thinking types while Te-doms are gut types. Therefore INTJ if they are in action mode that usually has a clear purpose while for Te-doms action for the sake of action is much more acceptable scenario. Do we use terrain to our advantage ? Sure, not using the potential advantages is silly as it is inefficient and therefore it is often good to use it, all energy and resources saved today can be used tomorrow on something equally important. I am pretty sure that the following works for the most of younger INTJs: there are a very few things that make INTJ happy as a winning against stronger opponent that is based on superior knowledge, better planning, dirty tricks and sheer determination. I still remember my gaming days with somile and all those people who were openly cursing my name because of the all annoying sneaky things I was doing to them. My favorite were the ones that even gave up from the games since they were so angry that they have requested that we settle this outside like "real man". Making a person angry is often the key of winning since angry people have the tendency to make really bad decisions when they are angry, plus they may loose credibility if they can't control their emotions. What can be described as using the terrain to your advantage. After all INTJs are the only TJs that have intuition above their Te and that should be visable in results.



Yes, INTJs prefer having a plan before things are put into practice and that is because of the very reason how INTJ perceives situations. In most situations INTJ is pretty sure that he/she knows the results even before event plays itself out. This depends on how many information is available but even in worst case scenario we can pinpoint the situation into the few most likely scenarios, however as the data that is available grows we get exponentally more certain about the outcome. In other words if you know the outcome you know how exactly this situation came to be and if you know that you know where are the weak points and where you can turn the tide with what you have. Another thing about making a plan first and than acting in comparison with moving as you go is that while you are planning somewhere in the corner you are at the "blank" state and you don't trully show your intentions, what can give you the element of surprise. Plus you will not get many pointless question until you have solved the issues, which can cause resisting even before idea was fully forged. Therefore in may situations it is better to wait and them roll everthing out as a surprise, what usually insures that oppostion does not have the time to organize and react. In my opinion only Fi is what prevents us from becoming hardcore villains.



When I was 24 I have created the 4+1 model how human history will end. (long story) The trick is that this basically gave me the framework for everything and therefore nothing surprises me since for me the future is generally known and everything that is going on is just getting closer to one of the five scenarios. People find me cold hearted since I am not reactive about little things, but I would not switch our pictures of the reality since my calms me down and gives certainty. Ni+Te is all about preventive-proactive thinking, final solutions, predicting things before they happen, redefining terms in order to make them sync with reality or so that they give you advantage, being a black box when it comes to you weaknesses and noticing what is really important and bottom line.



My 2 cents.

 

[Kullervo]

Agreed and while you won't hear a vehement disagreement from me, an Fe dom could potentially lose their shit over the comparison.

...depending on whether the comparison offended their value system. Again, you have much to learn

 

[EJCC]

My interior world is very...nebulous unless I consciously try to access it through a practice like meditation. I feel very "blank" most of the time unless I direct my mind towards something.
...

When it comes to using Te to organize things, I'm a bit more engaged. Te is very automated in the sense that like...you have a very defined set of steps that you go through, so it's reasonably easy to come to a decision quickly because you're just "criteria matching" at a certain level.

I'm exactly the same way.

I think your question really is more about subjective opinion or emotional content. This actually came up in Vent yesterday night. Subjective evaluations of any sort are challenging for me. The easiest thing for me to determine is when I enjoy something. It can take a little digging to figure out why, but there are certain things that really make me happy and I'm pretty attuned to those things. It's almost a pass/fail thing.

Sometimes I forget why the ESTJ stereotype involves huge amounts of anger, and the ENTJ stereotype doesn't. I am VERY good at deciding what I subjectively think of something. I can do that with 99% accuracy in a matter of seconds. I think most ESTJs are good at that. Maybe it's Si added to Fi, reinforcing and broadening our obsession with the "right"/"wrong" dichotomy?

Oh yeah. Privacy is a HUGE thing for me, and I compartmentalize my life almost automatically. I think for Te-doms it's a protective reaction to inferior Fi. The more someone knows about me, the more access they have to that very vulnerable part of me, which equates to control on some level and is therefore intolerable.

I never would have thought of this tendency as being related to "privacy", and I've never in my life thought about it in those terms. But then again, my vulnerabilities tend to disappear to me, not just to other people, when they aren't relevant. So I see myself, in the moment, as being VERY open, because I'm sharing everything that's on my mind -- but my vulnerabilities are not on my mind.

I'm thinking out loud here, because, again, I've never thought about it this way. Will ruminate some more...

It's also a weird Fi gesture of accommodation. Like I always try to "meet people where they're at". I have a lot of interest and things I enjoy, but I don't expect anyone to enjoy all those same things. I will share the things with them that I know we have in common, and can build relationships elsewhere to have those other needs met.

The bolded is HUGE. So, so important. IMO that's why your typical TJ will only open up in response to someone else opening up (IME). Letting them set the tone. Not wanting to take that risk without certainty that the relevant emotions will be well-received.

Either way, when it comes to my own interests, I don't really need people to enjoy the things that make me happy, and sometimes don't necessarily want to as I can get into some weird rabbit holes. I also effectively compartmentalize enough that if I do have some Chinese Wall around some part of my life when it comes to someone, I'll completely forget that part of my life exists until I'm around someone else who has "permissions" for that part.

I don't know if this happens to you, but when I'm in inferior-Fi and thinking "why does no one appreciate me" and "why does no one understand me" and all that BS, there's inevitably a moment when I think "oh, shit, I dug my own grave here".

It really is such an innate thing to me that it's funny to explain. Doesn't everyone do that on some level? People don't really tell each other everything do they?

Watching movies about very close-knit pairs/groups of friends has always felt like watching pure fantasy, to me, because of that. I don't see those sorts of relationships as being real.

See!! It's not just me! MUST HAVE SUFFICIENT CLEARANCE!!!

I really should start ranking the levels of clearance like the federal government does.

 

[Virtual ghost]

I never would have thought of this tendency as being related to "privacy", and I've never in my life thought about it in those terms. But then again, my vulnerabilities tend to disappear to me, not just to other people, when they aren't relevant. So I see myself, in the moment, as being VERY open, because I'm sharing everything that's on my mind -- but my vulnerabilities are not on my mind.

I blame your So/Sx/Sp variant for this one.

 

[EJCC]

I blame your So/Sx/Sp variant for this one.

I was wondering if that was part of it.

 

[VagrantFarce]

I've been told that I'm an extremely linear thinker: If this, then that. From point A to point B. Pros and cons. If I'm told that things are more nuanced than that, then I tend to take an identical approach on a micro level: if this, then that, from point A to point B, pros and cons, with regard to each nuance. But in my case it always starts with the question of "What needs to be done here?" While I liked the general style of [MENTION=5632]VagrantFarce[/MENTION]'s post, it implied that for ExTJs the most "useful" option is ALWAYS the most desired -- but generally speaking it's more about The Goal, which could be anything, useful or non. For example, parties aren't useful, and neither are most hobbies.

Yes, you can't judge something's use without a goal in mind.

I think VF's post is very interesting, its closest to my own experience, I would qualify it because I hope that I dont objectify individuals quite so much, at least I'm cognizant of how oppressive that can be, even when there isnt any slavery, coercion, violence or compulsion involved.

For sure, only seriously unbalanced people are 100% objectifying. I always over-do it when describing functions on their own.

In economic terms the rational calculating utilitarian maximiser or "economic man" from classical and neo-classical economics. Or does this owe more to object relations theories?

The idea of an "object" has its applications in all sorts of fields, but I think in a lot of cases it's fuelled by a kind of Te-need to quantify something, and distinguish it from something else.

 

[ceecee]

...depending on whether the comparison offended their value system. Again, you have much to learn

I'm pretty sure the only offensive thing to the Fe doms is that you appear to be on their team now.

 

[Kullervo]

I'm pretty sure the only offensive thing to the Fe doms is that you appear to be on their team now.

Well at least the average testosterone level has gone up. I have a lot of women to look after.

 

[Lark]

Yes, you can't judge something's use without a goal in mind.



For sure, only seriously unbalanced people are 100% objectifying. I always over-do it when describing functions on their own.



The idea of an "object" has its applications in all sorts of fields, but I think in a lot of cases it's fuelled by a kind of Te-need to quantify something, and distinguish it from something else.

I know that sometimes I have to reflect on exactly how I approach things because I can engage in some kind of exaggerated thinking of people as things, means to an end, functionaries, I dont mean that in a necessarily demeaning way though because sometimes I think of myself in that way too, like what is the role, expectations, likely outcomes, the rational calculating utilitarian maximising thing.

Sometimes I think of it in terms of that philosophical thought experiment about the fat guy lodged in the tunnel entrance vs five people trapped in the tunnel with rising water, I think for most TJ users that fat guy is history with the dynamite, much less agonising than anyone else.

 

[Tellenbach]

How I think:

Someone upthread mentioned coherence and that's exactly how I'd describe my thinking process. My worldview is an attempt at constructing a coherent reality where all empirical evidence fits snugly with each other.

If I were to consider an idea (let's say the merits of the minimum wage), I'd ask:

What's been done in the past? How often has it been done? What were the results? Why were the results the way they were?

After learning and gathering data, I'd attempt to make sense of the information through inductive reasoning, mostly. I see the limitations in this sort of thinking: if human nature changes, I'd be screwed, but I don't think that's happened yet.

 

[á´…eparted]

My goodness lots of really interesting stuff to read! I would write a book if I replied to every single thing in depth, so I am going to try to single out things that stand out the most.

Time to join the bullet-point party*. Here's how I'd phrase my decision-making process -- taking @Wind Up Rex's process and making it more Si-flavored:

1. What is the goal?
2. Where am I now relative to the goal?
3. What plans of attack to I have to choose from?
4. Weighing a list of pros and cons of each of these plans, which is the best suited to the details of my project? e.g. if time is the most important factor, then which of these is the quickest?
5. If the options don't look great: Is it worth it for me to pursue this project? If not, then what are my alternatives?
6. Either repeat from step 1, or make decision and proceed.

If I were to draw this out, instead of writing it out, it would look a lot more like a flow chart. Entirely based on "if this, then that" statements, or questions with multiple answers.

I've been told that I'm an extremely linear thinker: If this, then that. From point A to point B. Pros and cons. If I'm told that things are more nuanced than that, then I tend to take an identical approach on a micro level: if this, then that, from point A to point B, pros and cons, with regard to each nuance. But in my case it always starts with the question of "What needs to be done here?" While I liked the general style of @VagrantFarce's post, it implied that for ExTJs the most "useful" option is ALWAYS the most desired -- but generally speaking it's more about The Goal, which could be anything, useful or non. For example, parties aren't useful, and neither are most hobbies.

*I'm just saying that to be diplomatic -- y'all know I was the first one here. I'm HOSTING the bullet-point party.

---------------------------------------------------

Also:

One of my major weaknesses is planning for a wide variety of worst case scenarios. What you're describing with regard to risk assessment is a bit beyond anything that comes naturally to me. The ESTJ decision-making process, while equally likely to be vague and minimally prepared, tends to rely upon contingency planning that relates to Si. We're quick to dismiss anything we deem "unlikely", which is why we make such quick decisions.

Keeping in mind that the list I gave above is just about all there is to the process, then yes, that's accurate. I don't do a lot of "unnecessary" thinking when I plan. It's all: "will X help with Y?" "will this be a problem?" "how does this measure of 'best' relate to this other measure of 'best', and which should i rely upon more?"

Um... Avoidance of vulnerability? Deciding that only particular spheres deserve to know more, or could handle knowing more?

I'm not all that obsessed with privacy, but I do care a lot about making sure that, if I'm sharing particular information with people, they won't do anything stupid or hurtful with it. Which may be what you're talking about.

Maybe you're confused by it because it's our Te way of handling people -- making decisions based not on the individuals and their feelings, but cost-benefit analysis and risk assessment.

Yeah, this definitely highlights how linear Te is. In particular when it's paired up with Si. Ni does sort of throw a "nebulousness" into the mix as WUR pointed out, but at the end of the day Te is surprisingly simple, and not the least bit convoluted. It's sort of confusing to me because I feel like so much information is being omitted in thinking, but it truly isn't needed. I guess what surprises me, is the lack of "back processing" or the inessent brain chatter that I for years expected everyone to have, but it seems like Te just doesn't have that.

I'll comment more on the privacy stuff below to other people so I don't repeat myself.

Were you invited? Because you know one part of someones' social life doesn't mean you are privy to all of it. It also may come from compartmentalization, which I think has a lot of Te floating around. Compartmentalizing is just another type of organizing.

Yes, compartmentalization is the word I was looking for, it's a thing that Te does, and when I was younger, I honestly saw it as rude . Not anymore of course, but it felt like secrets were being made for the sake-of and I didn't get it. I mean, being invasive is a bit no-no and anyone who crosses a line should be told off. It's just always struck me as odd that someone might be disinclined to speak about good experiences they had with friends not connected to you, or just fail to disclose it all together. I'm comparing myself to this of course so I know that's not the best thing to do.

The past several days have shown me that I really was missing *A LOT* of holes with how I thought Te internally operated in others. Things I had no clue could ever be done or function. I blame my failure to see this on Asperger's, and the only way I can start piecing it together is to see how others explain it for them, and then try to watch it in practice. This could explain and fill the holes for "type" of people that remain sort of an enigma to me.

Hm. This is making me wonder a bit more about Hard's question -- because you're interpreting it differently than I did, and I'm not satisfied with my answer anymore.

@Hard are you thinking of particular situations when you ask that? I think part of why I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around it, is that I see myself as fairly open*. I don't get mad when my friends from one sphere meet my friends from another sphere, for example.

*Some restrictions may apply

Here's an example: Say you went on a date with a person you just met, and it went fairly well. No one else knows this person except for maybe one or two people. I could understand withholding if it went poorly, or if you were still feeling it out to see if it were going anywhere. Nevertheless, some individuals won't tell their friends, or if asked will give very little detail about it, and not share how they felt or reacted to things. Basically details are left out. I'm wondering now if part of it is because those details simply don't exist. It just seems odd to me that it wouldn't be shared.

Will touch on @EJCC's response momentarily. Lot of interesting stuff there.

My interior world is very...nebulous unless I consciously try to access it through a practice like meditation. I feel very "blank" most of the time unless I direct my mind towards something.

I understand my approach to thinking as such is a very odd compared to what many experience. If I'm working on a problem that I'm having trouble figuring out, I kind of just set it up in my mind and forget about it. Then a few hours or days later a solution will sort of percolate back up. I think that might be an Ni thing.

When it comes to using Te to organize things, I'm a bit more engaged. Te is very automated in the sense that like...you have a very defined set of steps that you go through, so it's reasonably easy to come to a decision quickly because you're just "criteria matching" at a certain level.

I think your question really is more about subjective opinion or emotional content. This actually came up in Vent yesterday night. Subjective evaluations of any sort are challenging for me. The easiest thing for me to determine is when I enjoy something. It can take a little digging to figure out why, but there are certain things that really make me happy and I'm pretty attuned to those things. It's almost a pass/fail thing.

Do I like this thing? Yes. Then I will invest time and thought into it.
Do I like this thing? No. Then I will not invest time and thought into it. At all. Whatsoever. To the point where I realized not so long ago that if I have no opinion on something or someone OR can't remember that that thing or person exists most of the time, then I probably don't like them for whatever reason. Don't necessarily know why. They're just not something I can give a definite "Yes" to. It makes it very hard to hold onto most bad feelings for some reason unless they are grounded in something pretty intense and personal.

I think that this attitude can be misinterpreted as cold or cruel, but it's not intended to be that way. It's definitely some selfish Fi shit, but it's not personal.

I can definitely see the Ni influence here, because there is some level of nondescript quality to it, and this sort thoughtless-awareness that is present. Nevertheless this is sort of what I was getting at. It's so strange to me that someone could be so, well, blank (as you put it). My mind is *constantly* processing something. If I am in a social setting I am processing all KINDS of information that people give off. I absolutely have to or I can't socially navigate. This is the primary reason why I have such a hard time wrapping my brain around this (I'm starting to get there; it will take time), because it seems like something so essential and I can't picture how someone would get along without it.

This whole thing is very linear, and as Te would be, very efficient. I mean, I do the same thing where if I have a problem I can't solve, I eventually dump it to the back of my mind and let back processing do it's thing, but I see that as more Ni than anything. It is about subjective content, yeah. It's EASY (like really fucking easy) for me to figure out if I like something or not, regardless if it is subjective or objective. Having this set up as you do, with it being sort of binary pass/fail, it feels like it might miss things. Let me try and ground this a little bit: career/education paths. Does this process make figuring out those sorts of direction difficult? It seems almost unusual, because I would imagine that Te would regard career/education paths as something very important and top priority to solve. It seems like it would spend a lot of effort figuring out what is liked, disliked, the right decision, and wrong decision. That said, because of it's inate simplicity and efficiency with solving likes and dislikes, does that mean that for even objectively important things like that are really difficult to solve? That question goes for any Te user who might want to answer btw.

Oh yeah. Privacy is a HUGE thing for me, and I compartmentalize my life almost automatically. I think for Te-doms it's a protective reaction to inferior Fi. The more someone knows about me, the more access they have to that very vulnerable part of me, which equates to control on some level and is therefore intolerable.

It's also a weird Fi gesture of accommodation. Like I always try to "meet people where they're at". I have a lot of interest and things I enjoy, but I don't expect anyone to enjoy all those same things. I will share the things with them that I know we have in common, and can build relationships elsewhere to have those other needs met.

As sort of an aside, TJs I've known are more empathetic to those around us than we tend to let on. It's not our default mindset to talk about our observations or what we sense from those around us, and sometimes we don't always have the ability to communicate what we're seeing or "picking up" empathetically. At least for me, Fi is almost like...a not quite real thing. So even though I feel on an intuitive level that something might be true about a person, absent someone confirming for me explicitly "Hey, it makes me happy when you do this." or "You know, it makes me feel really shitty when you do that." those subjective impressions are as ephemeral to me as deja vu.

Either way, when it comes to my own interests, I don't really need people to enjoy the things that make me happy, and sometimes don't necessarily want to as I can get into some weird rabbit holes. I also effectively compartmentalize enough that if I do have some Chinese Wall around some part of my life when it comes to someone, I'll completely forget that part of my life exists until I'm around someone else who has "permissions" for that part.

It really is such an innate thing to me that it's funny to explain. Doesn't everyone do that on some level? People don't really tell each other everything do they?

THIS is exactly what I was talking about with the privacy thing and Te. I'm actually wondering if this is more of an 8 thing then, as opposed to Te, but I think it still applies here. An ENTJ 8 I knew in college was exactly the same way, and good god it confused the living crap out of me. To this day I still don't really "get" this nature. Though, this does make it make more sense. It almost seems like Te is more apt to take the "less is more" and not impose experiences on someone. Instead of the "trial and error" approach of "hmm, they might find this interesting, let's talk about that". I've noticed Te users though get offended if pressed for more details on something, even casually, and it catches me off guard because I won't see it coming. This is all sort of cold because it seems like it simply doesn't need or care about how people might react to the experiences you have. Nothing wrong with it at all though. It's also like there is this weird level of lacking self awarness, but in a very specific area.

I could be the anomoly here, but I really do share basically everything with everyone. 95% of the time I have to actively restrain myself from telling someone something. That said, if it is information that has been confided in me in confidance or trust, that never comes up, but if it's information about myself I spit it out. I almost had my acceptance letter to grad school revoked because I spilled my guts too much when I visited as a prospective student (now everyone laughs at the story), people thought I was nuts and a safety hazard. If I ever struggle to spit something out, it's very unusual and I will thing to myself "AHH! Why am I afraid of saying this? why is there resistance?!" and freak out over the idea that I have to fight to spit something out, because it's so rare. I get that not everyone is as candid as me, but the way in which Te goes about this lack of candidcy, is just... particularly hard for me to grasp, but I'm starting to get it.

I'd write more but I have work to do atm. Either way, this is all delightfully wonderful insight into Te thanks to you all and I look forward to seeing this thread progress!

Well at least the average testosterone level has gone up. I have a lot of women to look after.

I'm quite certain most women here don't want you to "look after them".

 

[cascadeco]

This whole thing is very linear, and as Te would be, very efficient. I mean, I do the same thing where if I have a problem I can't solve, I eventually dump it to the back of my mind and let back processing do it's thing, but I see that as more Ni than anything. It is about subjective content, yeah. It's EASY (like really fucking easy) for me to figure out if I like something or not, regardless if it is subjective or objective. Having this set up as you do, with it being sort of binary pass/fail, it feels like it might miss things. Let me try and ground this a little bit: career/education paths. Does this process make figuring out those sorts of direction difficult? It seems almost unusual, because I would imagine that Te would regard career/education paths as something very important and top priority to solve. It seems like it would spend a lot of effort figuring out what is liked, disliked, the right decision, and wrong decision. That said, because of it's inate simplicity and efficiency with solving likes and dislikes, does that mean that for even objectively important things like that are really difficult to solve? That question goes for any Te user who might want to answer btw.

I've always thought career/education was something important that needed to be solved, but I think it quickly can become extremely difficult to solve when Fi is brought into the mix - if the end goal/need of having a career cannot be reconciled with ones values, or if there are conflicting things a play. I think this is where for some TJ's and FP's, it's super easy- everything's relatively smooth, can easily identify a career path that lines up with their values and interests. ie pragmatic Te need of income and survival can be met because there are careers that jive with what they find important and the life they want. vs other people who can't identify that or make sense of it, where there isn't a perfect fit. I fall into the latter, career has always been the bane of my existence, probably because I've never particularly wanted a 'career', partly because the things I actually care about or feel I can offer to the world don't pay (I'm not whining, this is an ongoing thing I try to figure out and work on, trying to find something I enjoy). Then I have a very good TJ friend who never had a problem, went into engineering, got her masters, and continues to love her job, she now being in her late 30's.

 

[1487610420]

I always love how these threads, such good reference for concrete knowledge.

 

[Duffy]

I've always thought career/education was something important that needed to be solved, but I think it quickly can become extremely difficult to solve when Fi is brought into the mix - if the end goal/need of having a career cannot be reconciled with ones values, or if there are conflicting things a play. I think this is where for some TJ's and FP's, it's super easy- everything's relatively smooth, can easily identify a career path that lines up with their values and interests. ie pragmatic Te need of income and survival can be met because there are careers that jive with what they find important and the life they want. vs other people who can't identify that or make sense of it, where there isn't a perfect fit. I fall into the latter, career has always been the bane of my existence, probably because I've never particularly wanted a 'career', partly because the things I actually care about or feel I can offer to the world don't pay (I'm not whining, this is an ongoing thing I try to figure out and work on, trying to find something I enjoy). Then I have a very good TJ friend who never had a problem, went into engineering, got her masters, and continues to love her job, she now being in her late 30's.

I knew a TJ, an INTJ to be specific, and an INFP, who took a more resigned approach. Their career wasn't something ideal and certainly not loved, but they viewed work and values separate. Work was just work, while personal time was spent doing what they enjoyed and that was that. I thought the ability to compartmentalize this aspect of them self impressive, and for a while I took a similar approach. Of course, this crumbled. I feel like I have vivid impressions of what I want my life to be like, but as soon as it's in my field of vision, it dissolves. Even arriving at my current line of work, the most ideal I've had, I find myself even more disgruntled. All these wants and I don't know what I want. When you said you never wanted a "career" because it felt like what you have to offer wasn't something that "paid," it resonated with me. The things I'm drawn to are either saturated, thus over competitive, or simply difficult to make a living out of. I have depressive tendencies so maintaining quality work in a prolonged competitive atmosphere is not going to happen.

The INTJ had the right idea. Simple work that allows time for passions and hanging out with good people sounds ideal.

 

[grey_beard]

Well at least the average testosterone level has gone up. I have a lot of women to look after.

Te does NOT stand for Testosterone. (Neither does Fe stand for Feminine.)

 

[cascadeco]

The INTJ had the right idea. Simple work that allows time for passions and hanging out with good people sounds ideal.

I currently have an extremely 'simple' low paying job, in many ways it's the most enjoyable to date. However it's not sustainable because currently I lack things outside of work that I desire, and that's probably the simplest way to put it; I have gaps in my life. Thus I'm not getting enough 'sustenance' outside of work. Also, reality is I need higher income to be able to do more of what I'm passionate about.

I've done the resignation 'it's just a job' thing, told myself that for years, but that doesn't work for the long term, I can only kid myself for so long. Ultimately I need to have a net positive feel for whatever job I do, neutral doesn't work for long as it eventually morphs to negative.

But yeah, it's a journey, I have tried various things and will continue doing so.

 

[violet_crown]

Yes, INTJs prefer having a plan before things are put into practice and that is because of the very reason how INTJ perceives situations. In most situations INTJ is pretty sure that he/she knows the results even before event plays itself out.This depends on how many information is available but even in worst case scenario we can pinpoint the situation into the few most likely scenarios, however as the data that is available grows we get exponentally more certain about the outcome. In other words if you know the outcome you know how exactly this situation came to be and if you know that you know where are the weak points and where you can turn the tide with what you have. Another thing about making a plan first and than acting in comparison with moving as you go is that while you are planning somewhere in the corner you are at the "blank" state and you don't trully show your intentions, what can give you the element of surprise. Plus you will not get many pointless question until you have solved the issues, which can cause resisting even before idea was fully forged. Therefore in may situations it is better to wait and them roll everthing out as a surprise, what usually insures that oppostion does not have the time to organize and react. In my opinion only Fi is what prevents us from becoming hardcore villains.

I think the bolded is the big takeaway for me. I think if Ni-dom arrogance is that faith in their own precognition, then Te-dom arrogance is basically, it's not really decided until I've had my say lol.

It's certainly possible to recognize where things are heading, but I guess it's always less interesting to me than what my own plans are. Being able to call that pitch is like a sailor knowing whether or not the wind will be with them. It's only relevant to me because I'm gonna be out that way anyways.