## View Poll Results: Do you use Ti or Te more?

Voters
5. You may not vote on this poll
• Te

2 40.00%
• Ti

3 60.00%

# Thread: Recognizing Te and Ti discussion/argument style

1. ## Recognizing Te and Ti discussion/argument style

I'm trying to fully wrap my mind around the difference in Ti versus Te thinking and communication. I've read so many different things about it that as soon as I think I understand I end up questioning the nature of my understanding once again.

Here are a few brief summaries of the way I've read them described:

Ti: Processes information in the external world so that it can be incorporated into their own internal patterns, schemas, and ideas. Subjective and not necessarily interested in how things are in reality; more interested in perfecting their subjective understanding of information.

Te: Processes information in the external world so that it can be objectively defined and described. Wants to be able to put order to objective information in a logical and undeniably objective/universal sense.
.................................................. ...................
Ti: Comes to conclusions based on a logical sequence of ideas that necessarily follow each other and usually can't be disputed by pure logic. Ex: A+B+C=D
Better at distinguishing specific flaws in a system, but often is inclined to miss the overall picture or general idea. May take longer to come to conclusion, but usually ends up correct because of making sure each logical step is valid (validity is never assumed).

Te: Comes to conclusions quickly, concerned with meeting the end goal rather than establishing specific steps. Formula more equatable to: A=D. May base decisions off of faulty premises because of lack of consideration of validity of each step in a process.

I'm not terribly great at reiterating what I have learned so far, but this is the gist of what I've heard.

I'm interested in general discussion about the Te/Ti functions, what their form of communication looks like/how it can be detected when one is being used over the other, and how to help Te and Ti thinkers communicate effectively.

I'm MOST interested in Fi/Te and Fe/Ti discussion, but I don't want narrow the thread down that much just yet

2. Ti is more subjective and abstract .
I guess the language isn't very different from Te except that Ti will try to think other posibilities that break the rules .

Fe and Fi is relative , This is different to other types but my father is an Intj and he is alot more Egocentric ... so assuming things and create histories that everything is about them , it's very Fi.

3. I usually get into misunderstandings with those who just want the action done. And I'm like hold on a sec guys, it's not that simple. Are you sure this is going to lead to this result? If only we can fix this step, this and this will happen.

I mean don't get me wrong Te is needed at times, sometimes it is a direct step, but not always. Ti can trip and self-rationalize and self-sabotage their own goals because they don't think the end at times.

But, sometimes I do act in a Te manner when I'm impatient and I'm like guys, nothing is getting done and it's been SO long. Lol and the rest of the group just don't respond and I'm like okay this is how it gets done.

Some people are too proud tho.

4. Originally Posted by natalia93
Ti/Te: Comes to conclusions based on a logical sequence of ideas that necessarily follow each other and usually can't be disputed by pure logic. Ex: A+B+C=D
Better at distinguishing specific flaws in a system, but (??invalid response deleted). May take longer to come to conclusion, but usually ends up correct because of making sure each logical step is valid (validity is most always assumed, due to survival necessity).

Not a function but a position of Primary Judging (Ti/Te): Comes to conclusions more quickly, concerned with meeting the end goal rather than establishing specific steps. Formula more equatable to: A=D. May base decisions off of faulty premises because of lack of consideration of validity of each step in a process.
Fixed. As far as 'speed' of thought, the speed of Ti/Te depends on if it's the individual's primary function, seeking resolve, or if P is their primary function, seeking exploration. For INTPs and ENTJs, T has no perceiving primary function to elongate it. These types are primary judgers who come to quick decisions.

The true difference between Ti and Te, since they're both inclined to deep thought and decisiveness, is whether it comes to decisions via a firm internal worldview (Ti) where the "definitions" are clear and assured (Ti), Or whether its rationale is about individual external contexts (Te) where the "factors" are clear and assured (Te.) That's usually why they say thinking is thinking, xNTJ does whatever an xNTP can do, but they have different values cognitively:

The introverted function is manifesting viewpoints via -> the subject, while the extraverted function is processing base information via <- the outside. Thus xNTJs stay with an open-minded worldview (Pi) while preferring resolve in factual summaries (Je.) xNTPs stay with building a solid worldview (Ji) while preferring participation in the change of new outside perceptions (Pe.)

Thus, xNTJs will look at one thing in a hundred different ways (JePi), while xNTPs will look at a hundred things in the same way (PeJi). The 'way' is the internal processing (Xi), the 'thing' is the outside objective fact (Xe) we're dealing with. This is the J vs P difference in general. Has very little to do with if you have a decisive tendency to life, that is if you're Judging primary or not. Nothing to do with Te. Te is about assuming order to outside factors and objects.

True J vs P thus is about whether the external situation has been summarized and an object chosen, or whether the external situation has been left open to perceive and an object not yet chosen. I hope this opens you up to the more rational and technically correct way of viewing the cognitive functions as they occur.

5. I think the best way it's occurred to me to explain the distinction of philosophies (obviously this is my interpretation, that I think best addresses all the writings i've read on the topic) is Ti is model-dependent/oriented, Te is more result-oriented (this is also why I think it's appropriate to see Ti as subjective: invoking a model is a matter of choice, ultimately). A way to think about this is that you can't always prove a statement about an object in certain models of it. Te, especially I think the N-T version, will switch amongst as many models as you need to ultimately output the result desired.

Te pairs with Fi because you can think, where Ti tells you what's true relative certain axioms, it does not tell you what axioms you actually desire. This, only Fi can, because it's complementary to Te, since this is related to what goals/output you want.

I find it's easier to recognize Te or Ti in a type by being specific what type it is. The type will have a particular philosophy towards each of those.

6. This video has been brought up in the past as a good example of Te vs Ti differences playing out irl. The script is an actual court deposition. Although it's comedians ramping up the ridiculousness of the communication misfire for the sake of making it as funny as possible, it still seems to be an effective little caricature of the difference.

Here's one of the past threads on it, which is worth perusing because there are some useful comments in it. IMO.

7. People are a little confused about MBTI's original definition. I don't follow their definition personally, but I will quote their viewpoint simply:

With ISTP & INTP, Ti is Step 1 reasoning. Induction and empiricism. Experiential reason. Ti learns its life philosophy from its own personal experience, testing and observations; from the ground up it figures out what's true. Its job is to test the accurate reality and effectiveness of all things until it can believe them confirmed to itself. It will only take seriously others ideas once it verifies them through enough experience.

With ISTJ & INTJ, Te is Step 2 reasoning. Deduction and classic logic. Holistic thinking. It doesn't test for accuracy in the real world, it moves to the next step. Te uses logic on knowledge we already assume to have as a culture. It learns its life philosophy from taking already established ideas and combining them into new understanding and applying further reasoning. Te by rule, as the function, is subject to possibly incorrect information if it doesn't develop Ti to verify truth experientially.

Again, this isn't my view, because my view is based on the real definitions.

8. Originally Posted by Dashy CVII
People are a little confused about MBTI's original definition. I will make it simple.

Ti is Step 1 reasoning. Induction and empiricism. Experiential reason. Ti learns its life philosophy from its own personal experience and testing; from the ground up it learns what's true. Its job is to test for accuracy of all things until it can believe them confirmed to itself. It will only take seriously others ideas once it can verify them through experience.

Te is Step 2 reasoning. Deduction and classic logic. Holistic thinking. It doesn't test for accuracy in the real world, it moves to the next step. Te learns its life philosophy from taking already established ideas and combining them into new understanding and applying further reasoning. It uses logic on knowledge we are already assumed to have. Te as the function doesn't focus on observable verification.
Ti-Ne is deductive and Ni-Te is inductive reasoning.

9. I personally agree with you. However, because we have so much data on the more common ISTP and ISTJ, many MBTI practitioners have disagreed with you on the definitions of Ti-Ne and Ni-Te. Due to INTPs and INTJs often mistyping in P/J, their functions are assumed in MBTI obtained from their clearer SP SJ counterparts. This is why MBTI originally clarified Reasoning as "Ti vs Te." This is also why MBTI defines both Ne and Se as external perception, Ne taking outward information via assumed perception of what's there, while Se taking literal perception. That part I believe to be true, but they messed up on the Ti/Te.

It is only until we abandon MBTI's lies of Extraversion and Introversion being about the social sphere, and adopt the true definition of E and I, ie. External object immersion vs Internal subject reflection, will we as a community know the truth of the innate functions in people. Te wants to test and verify certainties of the direct world, Ti wants to think and reason out established knowledge. In effect, both functions come down to the desire to "know." See my original post:

The true difference between Ti and Te, is whether it comes to decisions via a firm internal worldview (Ti) where the "definitions" are being clarified and assured (Ti), Or whether its rationale is about individual external contexts (Te) where the "factors" are being clarified and assured (Te.)

The introverted function is manifesting viewpoints via -> the subject, while the extraverted function is processing base information via <- the outside.
In Socionics, ILI is referred to as the Skeptic, the Observer, LII is the Analyst, SLI the Craftsman.

On the Nature of Externals and Internals (Te's and Ti's definition of "Truth")

xxTJs and their respective Socionics equals, favor The Thinking of Externals. They want to reason things firsthand and are skeptical of knowledge-bases and assumptions, uncomfortable with any leaps to untruth. The Skeptic and Craftsman's reasoning is focused on a personal relationship with firsthand reality, discovering fundamentals and philosophies through experience and empiricism, distrusting in a sense "logic" and seeking to uphold in themselves a confidence for what's really real, aiming for what they know can definitely be achieved or discovered. Te is the thinking of externals. LxEs for instance in Socionics are "Think on their feet" by motto, but for the xLIs, "think after wading around... there is too much information out there in the world to really gain a personal familiarity and confidence with," and this sure confidence is what the Te type really seeks compared to the Ti type. So Te often has to pause all the fields of material it doesn't know for sure, and establish linear priority. Hence Te's love for utilizing generalities as a pseudo-intellectual shortcut to gain grounds: Charting data and finding correlations, charting business mottos, applying rules of thumb, the best concepts to make mechanics move. They're all individual Te ways of dealing with the mess of skepticism it has, allowing itself to know in the very least "approach B works better." Extroverted functions may by nature, focus on the existential need for resolve rather than the mental ease of subjective interests. Hence Te focuses more on the means to a 'result,' while Ti eases into the thinking 'process.' This is because Extraverted functions may be dopaminergic in overcompensation, and thus seek real resolve while having problems with confidence in its T cerebral areas. Don't confuse these traits with the entire type however, ie. INTJ, who is introverted, low-energy, comfortable.

xxTPs and their respective Socionics equals, favor the Thinking of Internals, thus going back to what we're talking about in the previous post, these types skip "step 1 reasoning," the outside judgement filter, and move onto the next stage of verification requirements. They will simply take and accept academic knowledge-bases and then begin to do things with them, reasoning all about their internal potential and conclusions: they can find great patterns and internal consistency, even in solutions that aren't true, they systemise rules, LIIs for instance in Socionics have used logic alone to develop wide interconnected theories and real solutions brilliantly complex in achievability. We say that Ti has much more trust to simply take knowledge and use it, because it continues to rely on its own judgement: the difference is that Ti is the inside judgement filter, the next step of verification, not the outside filter. It's more focused on the process, less worried about being right than it is being reasonable, although they would say that reasoning IS the truth: Ti's truth comes down to the "way" things work, not the separate facts. LxIs don't worry about verifying externally, they see something with impressive roots and want to start thinking about it, reasoning in all the ways in areas' manifested parameters. The Analyst and Investigator's reasoning is holistic because it values it can afford to be, and is focused on a personal relationship with academics and logic. It is the thinking of internals. Introverted functions may by nature, focus on subjective interests rather than on an existential need for resolve, this is why Ti has a confidence to just 'think' as an activity of leisure. Introverted functions may be serotonergic in overcompensation, and thus embrace confidence and comfort while their main problem lies in neglecting thorough resolve in its T cerebral areas. Don't confuse these traits with the entire type however, ie. ENTP, who is extraverted, high-energy, direct.

I agree with Socionics that Te egos are good at using Ti, and they do so, but categorically we can make a clear distinction. Te egos don't compulsively focus on Ti. So why did MBTI call ISTPs Ti, and Socionics call ISTPs Te? Because of my point above: MBTI didn't adopt the correct Jungian definition of Extroversion vs Introversion and their functions. In reality, ExTJs aren't focused on the social sphere; they're focused on externals, on a one-to-one immersion with immediate reality via Thinking dominance. So ISTPs the same thing, but with Si coming first.

10. You are some wrong about Ti and Te.
Te just simple accept acedemic knowledge ... Te is very good at following rules and solve problems in a linear way .
Ti simply doesn't care what rules are about maybe for getting good grades ... Ti doesn't trust anything , Concept rebel is a good word for Ti.

#### Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO