• 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.

[Jungian Cognitive Functions] TJs: Te and empirical reality?

sculpting

New member
Joined
Jan 28, 2009
Messages
4,148
The thread topic could be phrased imprecisely or sloppily-please feel free to answer to the general idea and not the specific terms.

How do you know Te is objective? How do you know that the standards/metrics/empirical measures to which you apply to your ideas are really the most optimal? How do you know you are right?
 

The Great One

New member
Joined
Apr 27, 2012
Messages
3,439
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
6w7
Listen when I think Te, I think this....

no_soup_for_you.png
 

Thalassa

Permabanned
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
25,183
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sx
Se + Te reality is best reality!

It's just saying that logic is externally verifiable. It's how I knew I had Fi and Te. OF COURSE ethics come from within a person's feelings, and logic can only be checked externally, or you must be insane! Yeah, so that was my thought.

Apparently though Fe/Ti people see it opposite, though, like ethics must be an externally verifiable thing to get along with a group of people and logic comes from within (which still sounds ENTIRELY INSANE TO ME...I mean I understand that Ti is more about precision and picking things apart, but there's a reason I apparently consider it to be demonic.)

Te isn't necessarily empirical reality. Se would be that (but even Se is just a perception)...it is externally verifiable logic.

The problem is when Te users want to run on Te alone without balancing it with other functions. Obviously there is more to life than externally verifiable logic.

I think the biggest mistake people make with Thinking functions, in general, is in believing they somehow perceive reality more clearly. They're simply half of judging functions which judge half of reality.
 

Thalassa

Permabanned
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
25,183
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sx
Also, STJs are also TJs! All TJs are not NTs!

And I am neither.

*exits dramatically*
 

Kalach

Filthy Apes!
Joined
Dec 3, 2008
Messages
4,310
MBTI Type
INTJ
Excise your own desire to have all determination be open-ended and find out for yourself.
 

UniqueMixture

New member
Joined
Mar 5, 2012
Messages
3,004
MBTI Type
estj
Enneagram
378
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
How is Te about reality? Isn't it similar to deductive logic and so in many cases not accountable to reality?
 

Thalassa

Permabanned
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
25,183
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sx
How is Te about reality? Isn't it similar to deductive logic and so in many cases not accountable to reality?

Yes I agree with this, I mean "externally verifiable" can just mean pointing to sources that are "experts" in the external world. It doesn't always mean one is doing the measurement one's self.

This is why certain TJs can seem so "rule bound" because they are relying on "experts" and external structure for a sense of logical order.

On the other hand, I still think Te is closer to reality than Ti. Yes it is. YES IT IS.
 

Kalach

Filthy Apes!
Joined
Dec 3, 2008
Messages
4,310
MBTI Type
INTJ
^ my instinct is that the relationship to the perception function is vital. Imma claim there's no proper way of understanding a judgment "function" (beyond identifying it with lots of ideal properties, like "IT'S SOOOO LOGICAL, MAN!!!!") without connecting it to the context in which it operates: "Te" isn't Te, it's Te+Pe (and for other people, Pe+Te). So Te's as objective as any other e.


That's what's so great about typology: rag on some function, and you end up ragging on your own.
 

Coriolis

Si vis pacem, para bellum
Staff member
Joined
Apr 18, 2010
Messages
27,230
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
How do you know Te is objective? How do you know that the standards/metrics/empirical measures to which you apply to your ideas are really the most optimal? How do you know you are right?
Te is a process. The inputs come from and through other functions (I am being intentionally vague here). I see its objectivity in its reproducibility, by myself and others.

I do not always know that the standards I am applying are the most optimal. The best I can do is make sure they are the best ones I can come up with based on what I know and the resources at hand. Of course, if I discover better ones, I upgrade. On the other hand, overkill is inefficient. I do not need to get more precision, or more perfection than I need. This may sound unsatisfying, but it is often very practical. As a trivial example, my SO will use a level when hanging pictures to make sure they are truly 100% level. I just eyeball it, since I don't so much want it to be level as to look level in the context of the room, where the walls and ceiling might not be entirely square, etc.

I know I am right when things work, and work elegantly; when I am able to predict outcomes, avoid pitfalls, and succeed in what I am trying to do.
 

Thalassa

Permabanned
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
25,183
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sx
I do not need to get more precision, or more perfection than I need. This may sound unsatisfying, but it is often very practical. ...example, my SO will use a level when hanging pictures to make sure they are truly 100% level. I just eyeball it, since I don't so much want it to be level as to look level in the context of the room, where the walls and ceiling might not be entirely square, etc.

I wonder if your SO has Si as well as Ti? This sounds like hanging posters with my ESFJ ex.
 

Thalassa

Permabanned
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
25,183
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sx
^ my instinct is that the relationship to the perception function is vital. Imma claim there's no proper way of understanding a judgment "function" (beyond identifying it with lots of ideal properties, like "IT'S SOOOO LOGICAL, MAN!!!!") without connecting it to the context in which it operates: "Te" isn't Te, it's Te+Pe (and for other people, Pe+Te). So Te's as objective as any other e.


That's what's so great about typology: rag on some function, and you end up ragging on your own.

I'm not sure what you're rambling on about today, weirdo, because that was exactly my own point. Te isn't any more realistic than any other function.
 

Coriolis

Si vis pacem, para bellum
Staff member
Joined
Apr 18, 2010
Messages
27,230
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
I wonder if your SO has Si as well as Ti? This sounds like hanging posters with my ESFJ ex.
Tertiary Si, which often surprises me with its strength. Once I understood the role of the tertiary, alot of things about my SO made more sense.
 

Kalach

Filthy Apes!
Joined
Dec 3, 2008
Messages
4,310
MBTI Type
INTJ
The question is of relatively no importance unless some description of how judgment itself arises is found. Without an origin story, the rest is just ideal properties. So from whence does judgment itself arise?

Who else would like to know?

Donations accepted via Paypal.
 

UniqueMixture

New member
Joined
Mar 5, 2012
Messages
3,004
MBTI Type
estj
Enneagram
378
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Yes I agree with this, I mean "externally verifiable" can just mean pointing to sources that are "experts" in the external world. It doesn't always mean one is doing the measurement one's self.

This is why certain TJs can seem so "rule bound" because they are relying on "experts" and external structure for a sense of logical order.

On the other hand, I still think Te is closer to reality than Ti. Yes it is. YES IT IS.

I dunno. I think of mathematics as applied to physical reality in physics as a very Ti pursuit and that seems a whole lot more realistic to me than stuff like Bertrand Russell. I agree Ti left on it's lonesome is not very realistic. You see this a lot in pure maths where basically it becomes a fun #s game that is its own sort of universe that doesn't always coincide w reality. I agree that Se is most about reality, but it is not comprehensive.
 

Thalassa

Permabanned
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
25,183
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sx
I dunno. I think of mathematics as applied to physical reality in physics as a very Ti pursuit and that seems a whole lot more realistic to me than stuff like Bertrand Russell. I agree Ti left on it's lonesome is not very realistic. You see this a lot in pure maths where basically it becomes a fun #s game that is its own sort of universe that doesn't always coincide w reality. I agree that Se is most about reality, but it is not comprehensive.

No Se is not comprehensive, because it's merely a perception.

Ti seems like non-reality to me was my point. It doesn't seem sane to me to have logic come from within, and I've had a conversation with more than one INTP on-line where I was just like OH.MY.GOD. WTF. DOES. THIS. HAVE. TO. DO. WITH. REALITY.

But that doesn't really mean that it isn't sane, and it doesn't mean it's not part of reality, just as the seven other functions.

It just means that to me, logic seems like something that surely should be externally verifiable, and that's because I prefer Te.

Also, Te actually *is* more objective because it's extroverted. Te is objective objectivity and Ti is subjective objectivity.
 

UniqueMixture

New member
Joined
Mar 5, 2012
Messages
3,004
MBTI Type
estj
Enneagram
378
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
I find that extjs often are idealistic in their way of thinking and so they can blind themselves to reality by having a philosophy that they follow that isn't objectively true. I come from socionics world so we probably view this differently. I think it is most useful to think of all ways of thinking as "perspectives" not as fundamentally true though. To me Te/Ti don't really exist. That is why I am using types and describing their behavior as rational/irrational rather than talking about Ti. I think many ixtjs that are not familiar with socionics have a more comprehensive and objectively true view of the world than many extjs that I meet (in socionics ixtj is Ti dominant). To use a concrete example, I think Richard Feynman (who imo is entp) has a more comprehensive and objectively true view of the world than a Mitt Romney (who I believe to be entj). I think you disparage "Ti types" because you associate it with crazy internet people. I associate it with some of the most brilliant minds to grace the earth like Stephen Hawking.
 

Thalassa

Permabanned
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
25,183
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sx
I find that extjs often are idealistic in their way of thinking and so they can blind themselves to reality by having a philosophy that they follow that isn't objectively true. I come from socionics world so we probably view this differently. I think it is most useful to think of all ways of thinking as "perspectives" not as fundamentally true though. To me Te/Ti don't really exist. That is why I am using types and describing their behavior as rational/irrational rather than talking about Ti. I think many ixtjs that are not familiar with socionics have a more comprehensive and objectively true view of the world than many extjs that I meet (in socionics ixtj is Ti dominant). To use a concrete example, I think Richard Feynman (who imo is entp) has a more comprehensive and objectively true view of the world than a Mitt Romney (who I believe to be entj). I think you disparage "Ti types" because you associate it with crazy internet people. I associate it with some of the most brilliant minds to grace the earth like Stephen Hawking.

No, I don't think that's what it is at all.

I am not disparaging ANYONE. I have been casually seeing an ISTP for the past several months. I don't doubt his sanity because he's a Ti dom. I also think Albert Einstein was quite brilliant.

I'm talking about my own perspective of Ti and how it can frustrate and annoy me, especially when supported by Ne, apparently. I honestly now find it similar to [MENTION=5510]simulatedworld[/MENTION]'s bitching about Fi.

It doesn't mean that Ti is wrong or less than, it means that because of my own function preference, I have a serious aversion to it.

You on the other hand seem to have a clearer aversion to Te.

Interestingly, I see flaws in BOTH. I see flaws in all functions. But from my own personal perspective, Ti *in isolation* is the least preferred for me.

You apparently have a pretty strong opposition to Te. Are you an Fe dom or aux?
 

UniqueMixture

New member
Joined
Mar 5, 2012
Messages
3,004
MBTI Type
estj
Enneagram
378
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
I do not have an aversion to Te, just contrasting as I thought you were giving Ti -rep lol. But, just to be a braggart Te is usually used for gay shit like like law and economics whereas Ti is math/quantum physics. Just kidding. I think the Ni Te combo is particularly useful in understanding things like probability. Also, in socionics TJs are seen as having developed Ti AND Te. They just see one as "more important" than the other. Anywayz, enough of this gay shit. Back to REALITY ;)
 

Thalassa

Permabanned
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
25,183
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sx
I do not have an aversion to Te, just contrasting as I thought you were giving Ti -rep lol. But, just to be a braggart Te is usually used for gay shit like like law and economics whereas Ti is math/quantum physics. Just kidding. I think the Ni Te combo is particularly useful in understanding things like probability. Also, in socionics TJs are seen as having developed Ti AND Te. They just see one as "more important" than the other. Anywayz, enough of this gay shit. Back to REALITY ;)

Law isn't ghey. It's highly necessary to, you know, daily life and reality.

In fact, so are economics.

Quantum physics isn't necessary to daily life. Therefore it is less necessary, less to do with reality.

Yes, I know why I don't like Ti.

It is necessary, but in my world it is utterly superfluous. I concern myself actually with thinking about laws and economics LULZ.

And you just called it ghey.

You're fucking ghey.
 

UniqueMixture

New member
Joined
Mar 5, 2012
Messages
3,004
MBTI Type
estj
Enneagram
378
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
It's not complicated, so it's boring/not challenging.
 
Top