Peter as NTP. Fite me.

[Peter Deadpan]

This is a common result for me and I want to ruffle a few feathers cuz I'm bored. Extra points to whomever can actually get me to understand how a dominant Ti user processes the world, particularly people.

Let the games begin, but no hitting below the belt. And lookout for my killer right hook.

 

[Peter Deadpan]

I thought INTPs like to argue.
You've all let me down.

Now tell me how you systematize the nuances of people, goddammit.

 

[Yara the Corpse]

Well what if I'm not INTP? I can't answer until I'm 100% fo sho INTP...

 

[Peter Deadpan]

Well what if I'm not INTP? I can't answer until I'm 100% fo sho INTP...

Try. Fake it if you must.

 

[chickpea]

not sure about that, but i'm also not sure about your Fi, so... Sure!

 

[Peter Deadpan]

not sure about that, but i'm also not sure about your Fi, so... Sure!

You can't spell "Fite me" without Fi.

I basically just stole this joke from [MENTION=27952]Merced[/MENTION].

 

[JAVO]

I'm Ne > Ti, but I'll take you on.

*flexes muscles*

This is a common result for me and I want to ruffle a few feathers cuz I'm bored. Extra points to whomever can actually get me to understand how a dominant Ti user processes the world, particularly people.

Ahem... I have fur, not feathers, and it doesn't really ruffle. Why the fuzzy references?

Let the games begin, but no hitting below the belt. And lookout for my killer right hook.

Life is just a game, huh? :\ I doubt that a right hook has a very high kill rate.

 

[Peter Deadpan]

Life is just a game, huh? :\ I doubt that a right hook has a very high kill rate.

Is an uppercut to the nose a better bet? Asking for a friend.

 

[Peter Deadpan]

For the record, I did start this thread just for funsies. I would like to pick the brains of actual confirmed NTPs, mainly to solidify my understanding of Ti, and also to help me with my relationship with an INTP.

But in all seriousness, I do receive this result often. I like to take tests periodically to see how I morph or stay consistent, it's just fun to me (pushes up taped spectacles and snorts).

Here are two recent results:

I am not sure if these are more dichotemy based, but if they are, that could definitely explain any skewing. I seem to have the hardest time answering I vs E and T vs F questions comparatively. With that said, I think it's clear I am capable of being extremely emotional but also relatively insensitive at times.

I guess I just continue to make little sense.

 

[Amberiat]

For the record, I did start this thread just for funsies. I would like to pick the brains of actual confirmed NTPs, mainly to solidify my understanding of Ti, and also to help me with my relationship with an INTP.

But in all seriousness, I do receive this result often. I like to take tests periodically to see how I morph or stay consistent, it's just fun to me (pushes up taped spectacles and snorts).

Here are two recent results:

I am not sure if these are more dichotemy based, but if they are, that could definitely explain any skewing. I seem to have the hardest time answering I vs E and T vs F questions comparatively. With that said, I think it's clear I am capable of being extremely emotional but also relatively insensitive at times.

I guess I just continue to make little sense.

Those two tests are dichotomy based and they are highly inaccurate.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

Well... Ti is building, creating and playing with frameworks. Frameworks can mean many things. Would you like examples?

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

when in doubt, refer to sage Jung himself:

“External facts are not the aim and origin of this thinking, although the introvert would often like to make it so appear. It begins in the subject, and returns to the subject, although it may [p. 481] undertake the widest flights into the territory of the real and the actual. Hence, in the statement of new facts, its chief value is indirect, because new views rather than the perception of new facts are its main concern. It formulates questions and creates theories; it opens up prospects and yields insight, but in the presence of facts it exhibits a reserved demeanour.”

“Its aim, therefore, is never concerned with an intellectual reconstruction of concrete actuality, but with the shaping of that dim image into a resplendent idea. Its desire is to reach reality; its goal is to see how external facts fit into, and fulfil, the framework of the idea; its actual creative power is proved by the fact that this thinking can also create that idea which, though not present in the external facts, is yet the most suitable, abstract expression of them. Its task is accomplished when the idea it has fashioned seems to emerge so inevitably from the external facts that they actually prove its validity.”

“...evaporates into a representation of the unknowable, which is even beyond everything that could be expressed in an image.”

 

[Peter Deadpan]

Those two tests are dichotomy based and they are highly inaccurate.

Yes.

Still waiting for someone to actually answer my question.

- - - Updated - - -

Nevermind, haven't read through yet. Just woke up. I'm a dick. Ignore me.

 

[Peter Deadpan]

Well... Ti is building, creating and playing with frameworks. Frameworks can mean many things. Would you like examples?

Yes please!

when in doubt, refer to sage Jung himself:

“External facts are not the aim and origin of this thinking, although the introvert would often like to make it so appear. It begins in the subject, and returns to the subject, although it may [p. 481] undertake the widest flights into the territory of the real and the actual. Hence, in the statement of new facts, its chief value is indirect, because new views rather than the perception of new facts are its main concern. It formulates questions and creates theories; it opens up prospects and yields insight, but in the presence of facts it exhibits a reserved demeanour.”

“Its aim, therefore, is never concerned with an intellectual reconstruction of concrete actuality, but with the shaping of that dim image into a resplendent idea. Its desire is to reach reality; its goal is to see how external facts fit into, and fulfil, the framework of the idea; its actual creative power is proved by the fact that this thinking can also create that idea which, though not present in the external facts, is yet the most suitable, abstract expression of them. Its task is accomplished when the idea it has fashioned seems to emerge so inevitably from the external facts that they actually prove its validity.”

“...evaporates into a representation of the unknowable, which is even beyond everything that could be expressed in an image.”

This is exactly the type of speech that I cannot understand. I have to fight glazing of the eyes and generally cease reading through after rereading sections without being able to assimilate the message.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

Maybe I'm just stereotyping but you have a Socionics Beta vibe. Confrontational, but very ethical.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

Yes please!



This is exactly the type of speech that I cannot understand. I have to fight glazing of the eyes and generally cease reading through after rereading sections without being able to assimilate the message.

Jung is hard to read, I would call it dense, and I think this is in part due to translation from German to English, but he's also just very verbose. I am normally a fairly fast reader but I have to drop from 65 MPH to 25 when I read Jung.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

I guess the distillation of what I quoted from Jung would be:

Ti isn't concerned with facts for the sake of facts, but rather a logical framework or systematic understanding. Facts are only in service of achieving that framework of understanding, and despite what Ti dominant might like to believe, their logical understanding/framework is ultimately very subjective.

I would say ideas trump facts with Ti. The ultimate goal of Ti dominant types might be where objective facts line up with and flawlessly support their very subjective framework of ideas and understanding. When this doesn't happen, it's back to the drawing board, and the Ti dominant must either discard certain facts, or rebuild their understanding to accommodate new external information. The latter, I would say is the healthier approach and requires healthy use of the auxiliary, which may not always be comfortable for the Ti dominant.

Julius already explained the framework building better and with fewer words. I suspect you don't want pedantic, abstract explanations of Ti so much as concrete examples, so I'll try to think of some good examples. The problem is, when something is so comfortably used as the dominant function, I think it can be difficult to explain and break it down for people, because the dominant function comes so naturally, operating like muscle memory, that it takes a lot of thought for the user to analyze and lay it out; they almost have to explain it to themselves before they can explain it to others.

 

[Peter Deadpan]

Maybe I'm just stereotyping but you have a Socionics Beta vibe. Confrontational, but very ethical.

You're far from the first here to say that. Fact of the matter is that I've never really not tested as a Jungian NP (except my very first tests which were INFJ with basically no measurable J lean). I also always test IEE or EII with Ne subtype. Still though, I do get and see what you all have said regarding my Beta-ness.

Sometimes it feels like a puzzle I'll never finish.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

Ti reminds me of how my son builds things with his legos. He has an idea of a structure he wants to build, complete with various features and details that contribute to the overall whole. Each particular feature or detail needs to work in conjunction with the others to create the beautiful, logical whole. If any one part doesn't seem right or correct in relation to the whole, then he will modify it until everything works in service of the desired, completed whole. There's also a certain logic to each aspect or feature of the things he builds. So, if we're building a base, he wants to make sure that the doorway is big enough for his minifigures to fit through. If there's a watch tower, he has to have a ladder leading from the lower levels to the tower. He's very particular about making sure it all works perfectly. If too much of it "doesn't work" or fit his overall structure correctly, then he might get frustrated, deconstruct it, and start from scratch.

Does this make sense?

This is similarly how I approach making music, and why doing so can sometimes be a long and tedious process. It might not sound perfectly melodic but I need to feel like the various parts and instrumental tracks fit and make a sort of logical sense in the entire piece.

Gosh, I had originally pegged my son an NF, but I wonder more and more if he might value Ti. He might be an ENTP.

 

[Peter Deadpan]

Ti reminds me of how my son builds things with his legos. He has an idea of a structure he wants to build, complete with various features and details that contribute to the overall whole. Each particular feature or detail needs to work in conjunction with the others to create the beautiful, logical whole. If any one part doesn't seem right or correct in relation to the whole, then he will modify it until everything works in service of the desired, completed whole. There's also a certain logic to each aspect or feature of the things he builds. So, if we're building a base, he wants to make sure that the doorway is big enough for his minifigures to fit through. If there's a watch tower, he has to have a ladder leading from the lower levels to the tower. He's very particular about making sure it all works perfectly. If too much of it "doesn't work" or fit his overall structure correctly, then he might get frustrated, deconstruct it, and start from scratch.

Does this make sense?

This is similarly how I approach making music, and why doing so can sometimes be a long and tedious process. It might not sound perfectly melodic but I need to feel like the various parts and instrumental tracks fit and make a sort of logical sense in the entire piece.

Gosh, I had originally pegged my son an NF, but I wonder more and more if he might value Ti. He might be an ENTP.

Great example. My son is also an NTP best that I can guess (he's 6 and truly one of the funniest people I've ever known, and constantly curious).

I would say my approach to writing is exactly like this. It can take me awhile to write something or explain something because I want to make sure everything flows from A to B to ... Z and can be understood by all. It's also why I try to always reread everything I post, plus I don't like to leave typos or it cheapens the entire thing.

Interesting. Thank you.

So, how do you approach understanding people individually? Is that hard for you? Is it easier for you to analyze people collectively? If you are learning the nuances of a person's personality, how do you incorporate the more human characteristics (could include things like fears, weaknesses, strengths, emotions, past trauma, cause and effect type stuff)?