# Thread: INTJ vs INTP: A Guide

1. ^ I think it's incredibly oversimplified to think that Descartes argument compared to Nietzsche's is a perfect analogy to Ti and Te. There is always more than just Thinking at play in any argument. It takes N (which takes S) and F to come up with the premises; all Thinking does is analyze the structure of the argument in a binary way.

The definitional difference between the Thinking functions (which aren't even mutually exclusive) is that one is focused on the external standard and one is focused on the internal. In other words, Ti uses the metric relevant to the current internal thought process to judge the correctness of something, and Te uses the metric relevant to the current external situation. Both functions have only two possible outputs, though (true or false, 1 or 0, whatever you want to call it). Ti outputs true or false as a function of whether or not something fits in the thought process, Te outputs true or false as a function of whether or not something fits in the environment. So I don't really think soundness and validity perfectly describe their relationship.

As computer functions, they'd look like this (I'm just making up a language here):

Te (takes two inputs, e (the current environment), and x (something to be analyzed)):
If (x is consistent with e)
True
Else
False

Ti (takes two inputs, i (the current internal thought process, conscious and unconscious), and x (something to be analyzed)):
If (x is consistent with i)
True
Else
False

There are actually plenty of times that i and e aren't very different -- a given x would cause the same output using either Te or Ti.

I've gotten sort of off point, but I really just meant you can't think of Te and Ti as such different types of functions.

I think in general Ti is more concerned with internal consistency for this reason -- the internal standard itself changes with every thought -- once you start stacking premises, the internal standard will hold on to all of them and check them against each other (because the premises actually become the internal standard, as the user is currently thinking about them).

Te doesn't care about that kind of thing, because it just stays focused on what is environmentally relevant. When you feed Te a list of premises, all it does is check each of them against the environment -- the standard Te uses does not change as much with each input. If any premise contradicts the environment, Te just say "false" and be done with it, the function itself is not interested in whether it is hypothetically true given some other premises not visible in the environment.

That's why I like to simplify the whole thing by saying:
Ti - true/false
Te - works/doesn't work

I think that catches the actual mechanisms at play.

2. This thread sucks because it's

a.) annoying

b.) taking up all my boyfriend's time when he has better things to do

and c.) I just had a revelation, it is entirely one thing when you are alone and have no one stimulating to talk to and hence go on a forum to get your social/intellectual stimulation, I approve of this, but it is entirely a different thing when you DO have someone, or people to talk to but you don't, leaving them feeling intellectually frustrated, muted, and entirely bored whilst your constantly typing away at/to internet strangers.

I have used foruming as a coping mechanism when I didn't have real-life stimulation, but, heck, maybe it's because I'm an extrovert, but I always *prefer* the real stuff, in real time, and in real space.

Also, I AM SO FUCKING SICK OF TALKING ABOUT TYPOLOGY, FOR FUCKSAKE THERE IS SO MUCH MORE TO LIFE AND THE UNIVERSE THAN TYPOLOGICAL FUNCTIONS!!!!

Sorry, had to get this out, carry on.

3. ^^^
ENFP

4. Originally Posted by ReflecttcelfeR
'i' and 'e' determine the subjectivity of a function don't they, or this is at least one theory I'm sure.
Yes, but only in one of the three senses of objective/subjective that are relevant to function theory.

Originally Posted by freeeekyyy
Yes, because they don't see the "object." They only see information that the extraverted function has passed on about the object, making them subjective.
You have a lot of work to do on your understanding, your communication, or both.

Originally Posted by Stevo
Also I'm not a self-absorbed prick. Like some INTPs. Or at least I'd like to think so.

My kind can be just as self-absorbed as your kind.

Hell, plenty of people on this site would probably want to make that claim about me.

Originally Posted by ReflecttcelfeR
Perhaps it is better said that Ni is in fact right-brained and will take a creative stance towards what it is solving, but more biased to what they decide to actually try to solve (Te). Where as Ti will use a construct that already exists to attack different problems (Ne). Both alter to the object, but one takes an immediate turn to the left-field when solving and the other will turn to the left field when deciding what to solve.
You are getting closer to the heart of the matter with this post...

Originally Posted by IntrovertedThinker
Alright, Zara, I'll grant you this: Ni probably isn't left-brained, while Ti probably isn't right-brained. However, the following still seems to ring true, in general:

Now, does anyone care to attempt to theoretically explain why INTP's tend to come off more right-brained, while INTJ's tend to come off more left-brained?
Now this question points straight to the heart of the matter (and to what reflect was pointing to):

The answer to the question is actually quite simple: it's the exact reason why INTJs are labeled "Js" and INTPs are labeled "Ps" under MBTI's system -- INTJs extrovert their T (so they tend to seem more left-brained), while INTPs extrovert their N (so they tend to seem more right-brained).

It's good that you seem to have changed your language from one that connotes reality to one that connotes appearance.

Originally Posted by freeeekyyy
Because zarathustra is wrong. There's nothing about intuition that restricts it to the right brain. There's nothing about thinking which restricts it to the left brain. The orientation of a function changes its methodology entirely.

I will state again: if intuition resides solely in the right brain and thinking in the left, then the two cannot be used together. From my understanding, the way the hemispheres share information is by processing it individually, and then transferring the output to the other side. During processing, there is no crosstalk. Therefore, one must come to the conclusion that both hemispheres are capable of all modes, only in their respective orientation. The right brain uses thinking just as well as the left-brain, only from its own, very different perspective. Same goes for everything else.
Look, I'm no neuropsychologist, but, judging from you're writing, I'm pretty sure you're not either.

From the beginning, my argument was foremost that Ni is not a left-brained activity and Ti is not a right-brained one, as had been previously posited.

I still believe this to be the case.

Your construction above is a little ambiguous, so I'm not sure whether it necessarily contradicts what I'm saying.

If you are saying that Ni is left-brained so that it may communicate with Te (which is also left-brained), and Ti is right-brained so that it may communicate with Ne (which is also right-brained), and that the two sides of the brain are more-or-less incapable of functioning together, then you'd be saying that many other aspects of function theory are incorrect (e.g., the Ni-Ti dom loop of the INFJ wouldn't exist, nor would the doom loops or aux loops of any type).

I'm not saying that I'm absolutely certain about whether the functions exist, nor where in the brain they manifest, but I am saying that the constructions previously posited, including (at least based on my understanding of) yours, are almost certainly flawed.

I would love for someone with a strong background in neuropsychology to get up in this thread/forum, so we could hear from someone with a bit more authority on the matter.

I do think, though, that it's more likely that the T functions are left-brained and the N functions are right-brained.

Originally Posted by Evan
l would've written this on your wall thingo, but you don't have one for some reason.
I'll add you to my contacts.

Originally Posted by Evan
I know that, and I think it's cool to use as an analogy for Ti/Te.

I just meant that Ti - true, Te - works has the same logical content.
Originally Posted by Evan
Edit: now that I think about it, doesn't soundness include validity? If so, I think it's the wrong word to use. I don't think Te even cares about logical validity (whether the premises imply the conclusion), only whether or not the conclusion is true in reality.
I don't think either of these is true: Te looks for soundness.

The clarion call for this soundness takes the form of representational truth, but, due to the nature of reality, we generally have to settle for pragmatic truth -- the reason being that absolute certainty doesn't exist.

The claim that Te only looks for pragmatic truth is, in my opinion, a bastardization of reality.

Originally Posted by ReflecttcelfeR
I'm going off a little of what I had said earlier about the perceiving functions being right-brained due to the fact that these are extremely visible and require abstractions (non-material thoughts). We can then say that the judging functions would be left-brained because they are in fact logical. If we say this then every type uses both right and left brain equally, but this is not completely true, you just have to take a quiz to find out that most people don't use them equally. And so you end up finding out which functions they rely on. As it would go most who are INTP and INTJ lead with Ti and Ni respectively. Ni is a right-brained function so when you analyze their thinking it will seem as if they use the right side more, though it's only an illusion to the fact that this is merely their first attempt at analyzing anything. Conversely leading with Ti will give the illusion that the left side is used more than the right, once again the illusion. This is not the only facet though because now we have the direction in which their dominant functions face. They are both introverted and so when alone these functions tend to be used more, and as it goes their second functions are extraverted. This is what most likely people will judge both types on (the extraverted function) if the types decide to show because Ne and Te are the voice speaking for the dominant function. The voice of an INTJ is rather left-brained and the voice behind Ti is rather right-brained. I think this is where some might see the INTJ as left-brained, but it is only an illusion. This is my view of the situation. It's not the dom., but the aux. that really get these two in trouble, or are the main distraction.
This is very much in line with reality, with just a couple slight hiccups here and there.

Originally Posted by Garivande
I have a close INTJ friend and it's dead easy to tell us apart (I'm INTP). My office/desk/home/car etc always looks a mess (or worse). Her office etc looks so tidy and well organised it's scary (to me, at least - if her desk is empty, what is she working on???).

I'd say she's as much a thinker as I am - but in a different way. I do "real thinking" (in my view) - which is analyzing, following odd or mind-intriguing new paths, contemplating alternative views etc. While she does more "down-to-earth"-thinking. Which is planning and (mentally) organizing her environment and future. When faced with a (professional or otherwise) problem I will twist and turn it more before getting to action, while she will follow a more straight-forward mental path towards a solution.
You're committing the same error that IntrovertedThinker was previously making: calling INTP thinking "real thinking" and making INTJ thinking out to be a lesser form of thinking.

You're also making me feel like SolitaryWalker.

5. Originally Posted by MacGuffin
^^^
ENFP
Very much so, and a highly displeased and currently depressed one.

6. Originally Posted by Zarathustra
I'll add you to my contacts.

I don't think this is true.

Te looks for soundness.

The clarion call for this soundness takes the form of representational truth, but, due to the nature of reality, we generally have to settle for pragmatic truth -- the reason being that absolute certainty doesn't exist.

The claim that Te only looks for pragmatic truth is, in my opinion, a bastardization of reality.
I think you're labeling too much of your thought process as Te. You use Ti to some extent, too, and intuition (plus feeling, to some extent) is what sets up the premises of any argument.

Te itself is just whether or not something is consistent with the environment.
Ti itself is just whether or not something is consistent with the internal standard.

That's it.

I'm not saying Te users can't care about consistency with the internal standard, I'm just saying that they're not using Te when they do.

Originally Posted by SillySapienne
Very much so, and a highly displeased and currently depressed one.
lol lol lol

P.S. you're being manipulative (no offense). keep your relationship conversation to your relationship!

not trying to talk hella shit; my girlfriend uses similar strategies and I still love the shit out of her!

7. Originally Posted by Evan
I think you're labeling too much of your thought process as Te. You use Ti to some extent, too, and intuition (plus feeling, to some extent) is what sets up the premises of any argument.

Te itself is just whether or not something is consistent with the environment.
Ti itself is just whether or not something is consistent with the internal standard.

That's it.

I'm not saying Te users can't care about consistency with the internal standard, I'm just saying that they're not using Te when they do.
This may be true.

In a previous thread on Ne/Ni, during a conversation with uumlau, I hypothesized that Te might be more associated with inductive reasoning, while Ti is more associated with deductive reasoning.

8. Originally Posted by SillySapienne
Very much so, and a highly displeased and currently depressed one.
You should like, log off or something.

9. Originally Posted by Zarathustra
This is very much in line with reality, with just a couple slight hiccups here and there.
Where do the hiccups occur exactly?

10. Originally Posted by ReflecttcelfeR
Where do the hiccups occur exactly?
Throughout.

As you can see, my girlfriend doesn't exactly want me to spend any more time in this thread, so I'm logging out now.

I'll get back to you later if I can, but I probably won't have time... Going on a road trip soon (hopefully)...

#### 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