[Te] TJs: Describe Te as You Understand It

[violet_crown]

After his awesome Fe thread, [MENTION=23583]21lux[/MENTION] and I chatted about doing a couple of spin-offs that might allow other members to describe their experience of their own dom/aux function. I volunteered to start the Te thread!


So...same premise as the first thread: TJs please share your personal perspective of what Te is, and what your experience is like using it as a Te-dom or auxiliary.

Anyone who is curious about extraverted thinking either as a function, or who may have questions about random TJ quirks are welcome to ask those as well.

Thanks guys

 

[VagrantFarce]

"I don't care what anything was designed to do, I care about what it can do."

To me, it's about understanding the world in terms of "objects" and their "use" - things are understood, and actively judged, in terms of their utility and their ability to function in the world.

• How is this thing, or this person, useful?
• What is it trying to do?
• What can I use it for?
• How can we quantify this, or differentiate this from other things, in a way that everyone can immediately grasp? What does this help to enable? How does this fit into the world?

By comparision:

• Introverted Thinking has very little to do with utility - it's about having an internalised sense of logical "wholeness". It's more universal and timeless. Extroverted Thinkers might see Introverted Thinkers as being slow on the up-take, whereas Introverted Thinkers might see Extroverted Thinkers as rationalizing and controlling.
  
  
• Extroverted Feeling might think in terms of "utility", but is more about aligning to social values - it's about understanding (and indeed judging) things in terms of how well they align emotionally with their environment. Extroverted Feelers might see Extroverted Thinkers as blunt and unkind, whereas Extroverted Thinkers might see Extroverted Feelers as insincere.
  
  
• Introverted Feeling is paired with Extroverted Thinking, so the two work in tandem - Fi helps to create a deeply personalised set of values, and Te helps to set them out. Those that prefer Fi might look at those that prefer Te and think of them as heartless and controlling, whereas those that prefer Te might look at those that prefer Fi and see a bunch of god-damn tree-hugging hippies who need to get a haircut and a job so they can stop wasting Daddy's trust-fund on weed and tickets to Burning Man.

 

[Virtual ghost]

Function wise I am in xNTJ zone but I consider myself to be Te heavy INTJ.


Te was always pretty obvious in my personality since the very early years. What was due to the fact that I always move in planned out manner and I am not impulsive decision maker at all. However this is not only limited to my life since I have the tendency to interefere into other peoples lifes. Why ? It can be because I like them or I strongly think that they are making a mistake that can backfire on other people. The more I "attack" or reorganize the more I care actually however due to this I was called evil in all kinds of ways. I am coming from a place where democracy is still very young (younger than me) and therefore there is plenty of people that are not good decision makers since their whole life someone else was making the shoots for them. What I don't like as a lifestyle with some excptions of people and structures I have reason to trust.


In a more concrete manner: I am attracted to managment positions or positions of knowledge and power, I have learned to play chess before I learned how to read, I want to be a business owner and I develop in such directions, people have the tendency to ask me for opinions about their problems, I make lists all the time since I think that this way it is easier to keep things under control, I am pretty blunt most of the time, when I see countless flaws I have the tendecy to crash the whole thing and start from beginning, people may also feel stressed around me if I am in clear Te mode etc.


Basically I simply try to make things work and many people are often trying to prevent this because of their beliefs, interests or something. What has caused serious alienation end even further emotional detachment from others. For example back in school system was not results orientated and I had plenty of problems due to my personalty, because I have always tried to make something out of the knowledge I had. However in many cases that was not always possible and grading system was mostly pretty random. I mean you can't for the very similar knowledge give one person a C and A to another one just because you like them more. Plus due to financial problems there even was no school for week in some cases, what had led to "making up" of the grades. Etc etc.


Because of this I have spent much of my life reading various science and technical books in order to compensate for all of this and that I have something to work with. Also I have played quite a number of strategy and company building games in order to compensate for the real life problems that I couldn't solve since I was only a child. As a child I was also constantly punished by my parents for trying to make our house more orderly, because throwing useless things is just EVIL. What has led me to think even more that judgemet of others can't be trusted and that I have to force my own judgements if situation requires judgement. Basically every time I had a clear power the results were above expectations and that is due the fact that I take in the facts and than I try to arrange them in a way that they provide satisfying results and that everyhing is arranged in space and time in a way that the desired goal will be achieved. Plus I also spend some time thinking about the fact itself since some sources of information can't be trusted and with some common knowledge it can be easy to debunk the source. Therfore I can be annoyed by people who think that problems will sort themselves our on their own, what is because I know that this basically happens only if someone else solves the problem or if someone made a system that solves or disperses problems. The consequence of this was that this has even more pushed me towards the idea that I need to have a judgement and push people.



For me Te was aways the means to solve, notice or dodge problems that my living environment was full of since my birth and ability to push forward even if the road was blocked. Also Te provided me with the shield from others and their emotions that I did not want to experience for quite a number of reasons. In other words keeping the emotional distance from people was aways my trait and I have problems with everything that is overy soft and can't be measured or placed in some kind of a plan.

 

[Lark]

"I don't care what anything was designed to do, I care about what it can do."

To me, it's about understanding the world in terms of "objects" and their "use" - things are understood, and actively judged, in terms of their utility and their ability to function in the world.

• How is this thing, or this person, useful?
• What is it trying to do?
• What can I use it for?
• How can we quantify this, or differentiate this from other things, in a way that everyone can immediately grasp? What does this help to enable? How does this fit into the world?

By comparision:

• Introverted Thinking has very little to do with utility - it's about having an internalised sense of logical "wholeness". It's more universal and timeless. Extroverted Thinkers might see Introverted Thinkers as being slow on the up-take, whereas Introverted Thinkers might see Extroverted Thinkers as rationalizing and controlling.
  
  
• Extroverted Feeling might think in terms of "utility", but is more about aligning to social values - it's about understanding (and indeed judging) things in terms of how well they align emotionally with their environment. Extroverted Feelers might see Extroverted Thinkers as blunt and unkind, whereas Extroverted Thinkers might see Extroverted Feelers as insincere.
  
  
• Introverted Feeling is paired with Extroverted Thinking, so the two work in tandem - Fi helps to create a deeply personalised set of values, and Te helps to set them out. Those that prefer Fi might look at those that prefer Te and think of them as heartless and controlling, whereas those that prefer Te might look at those that prefer Fi and see a bunch of god-damn tree-hugging hippies who need to get a haircut and a job so they can stop wasting Daddy's trust-fund on weed and tickets to Burning Man.

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?

 

[Lark]

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.

However that said, all the time, I am thinking in terms of tasks or task centring and problem solving, it frustrates me the extent to which others are not, either because of their preferred modes of operating involve a lot of emoting or their awareness is so different to that of my own that they engage in the same sort of emoting by accident rather than design that the person who prefers that mode does.

The only times in my life that I can say I've permitted myself to be really emotionally driven were during periods of adolescence, I can and do explain that away with body and brain chemistry changes and developmental changes. Sometimes that appears "indulgent" to myself, because in some ways it would be for me, however, on the other hand I'm not sure I could even "indulge" it that much because a great deal of insincerity would be involved.

Thinking is just such a prevalent function for me that, while I experience a lot of stability in feeling or emotions, not so much impulsive or compulsiveness etc. No real incredible highs and lows, I wonder sometimes if I dont experience joy or happiness or disappointment quite like others do. If I do its in a pretty destructive way, or disturbing way, rather than merely perturbing, so I rapidly rationalise it away or do some kind of automatic thinking resembling different tricks from CBT to restore equilibrium.

So far as judging goes, I believe that it accompanies thinking, you can not reach conclusions without judgement and judging and I have no issues about it at all, people constantly attack judgementalism and are afraid to admit to any discrimination, ie choices, preferencing, conclusions, they engage in themselves because its all powerfully associated with political or ideological or cultural persuasions they are alienated from or have demonised and disowned within themselves. I think this is absolutely awful and perpetuates ignorance or an inability to even comprehend or critically evaluate as they once may have been able to. Orwell's newspeak ideas and the politicisation of language, norms and thinking is my go to reference in relation to that.

 

[violet_crown]

"I don't care what anything was designed to do, I care about what it can do."

To me, it's about understanding the world in terms of "objects" and their "use" - things are understood, and actively judged, in terms of their utility and their ability to function in the world.

• How is this thing, or this person, useful?
• What is it trying to do?
• What can I use it for?
• How can we quantify this, or differentiate this from other things, in a way that everyone can immediately grasp? What does this help to enable? How does this fit into the world?

By comparision:

• Introverted Thinking has very little to do with utility - it's about having an internalised sense of logical "wholeness". It's more universal and timeless. Extroverted Thinkers might see Introverted Thinkers as being slow on the up-take, whereas Introverted Thinkers might see Extroverted Thinkers as rationalizing and controlling.
  
  
• Extroverted Feeling might think in terms of "utility", but is more about aligning to social values - it's about understanding (and indeed judging) things in terms of how well they align emotionally with their environment. Extroverted Feelers might see Extroverted Thinkers as blunt and unkind, whereas Extroverted Thinkers might see Extroverted Feelers as insincere.
  
  
• Introverted Feeling is paired with Extroverted Thinking, so the two work in tandem - Fi helps to create a deeply personalised set of values, and Te helps to set them out. Those that prefer Fi might look at those that prefer Te and think of them as heartless and controlling, whereas those that prefer Te might look at those that prefer Fi and see a bunch of god-damn tree-hugging hippies who need to get a haircut and a job so they can stop wasting Daddy's trust-fund on weed and tickets to Burning Man.

First of all, the excellent use of bullets is just such a lovely start to a Te thread.

Like [MENTION=7280]Lark[/MENTION] said, what you've described resonates with my own experience. i've often described Te in the past as something of an "empty vessel". It's a very neutral function absent Fi content.

I've always been curious about Ni-Te vs Te-Ni in terms of process. For me, I approach most projects in the same way:

1. What is the goal?
2. Where am I now relative to that goal?
3. What resources (skills, time, capital, etc) is required to evolve my current situation closer to my target one.

Once I've identified 3), I can make two subsequent evaluations:

1. Cost/benefit of whether the goal is worth the time and investment to achieve it
2. If it is, determining a sequence of actionable steps based on research to do whatever is required to achieve that goal

That's pretty much my entire life. I occasionally do other things, but even eating, sleeping and "fun" are essentially requisite actions to keep me moving towards a desired end state.

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'm sure that ESTJs go through a similar but slightly modified process since they have Ne in that tert position. [MENTION=4945]EJCC[/MENTION] or [MENTION=15246]SD45T-2[/MENTION]--feel free to jump in on that.

I'd love to hear thoughts on differences re: planning approaches from the Te-aux crowd at well. [MENTION=9310]uumlau[/MENTION] [MENTION=9811]Coriolis[/MENTION] [MENTION=4347]Virtual ghost[/MENTION] or any other friendly ITJ.

 

[Lark]

First of all, the excellent use of bullets is just such a lovely start to a Te thread.

Like [MENTION=7280]Lark[/MENTION] said, what you've described resonates with my own experience. i've often described Te in the past as something of an "empty vessel". It's a very neutral function absent Fi content.

I've always been curious about Ni-Te vs Te-Ni in terms of process. For me, I approach most projects in the same way:

1. What is the goal?
2. Where am I now relative to that goal?
3. What resources (skills, time, capital, etc) is required to evolve my current situation closer to my target one.

Once I've identified 3), I can make two subsequent evaluations:

1. Cost/benefit of whether the goal is worth the time and investment to achieve it
2. If it is, determining a sequence of actionable steps based on research to do whatever is required to achieve that goal

That's pretty much my entire life. I occasionally do other things, but even eating, sleeping and "fun" are essentially requisite actions to keep me moving towards a desired end state.

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'm sure that ESTJs go through a similar but slightly modified process since they have Ne in that tert position. [MENTION=4945]EJCC[/MENTION] or [MENTION=15246]SD45T-2[/MENTION]--feel free to jump in on that.

I'd love to hear thoughts on differences re: planning approaches from the Te-aux crowd at well. [MENTION=9310]uumlau[/MENTION] [MENTION=9811]Coriolis[/MENTION] [MENTION=4347]Virtual ghost[/MENTION] or any other friendly ITJ.

I can identify with the sort of purposefulness of this, as in all actions or decisions serve a purpose or ought to and how to get them to serve as many as possible at once, perhaps some agonising about waste aswell, I'm always thinking about marginal economic costs of every single thing I do because choosing to do anything is by necessity choosing not to do something else.

However, I do wonder if this could be a consequence of social character or social engineering to, it does have more than a hint of neo-liberalism or the "wellness syndrome" about it, its something I'm ambivalent about to be honest because I would agree that there's a definite "neo-liberal character" and it can make a lot of "heat and no light" or constant activity requisite as means and end but at once I'm very aware there's one life to live, try and make it a good one and often those who have acted in line with what is criticised as the neo-liberal character go manage to live pretty good lives, ie healthy, physically fit, networked etc. etc. Maybe its balance? I'm not sure.

Also, and I suppose this relates to how extensive it is, but does it all sound a little dissociated from emotions per se? I can say that my cognitive style can make it resilient to stress and crisis but I also think that it means I'm pretty distant sometimes, someone I know talked to me about how my preferred cognitive style could be a consequence of slow burning traumas once and it was quite persuasive.

 

[violet_crown]

I can identify with the sort of purposefulness of this, as in all actions or decisions serve a purpose or ought to and how to get them to serve as many as possible at once, perhaps some agonising about waste aswell, I'm always thinking about marginal economic costs of every single thing I do because choosing to do anything is by necessity choosing not to do something else.

However, I do wonder if this could be a consequence of social character or social engineering to, it does have more than a hint of neo-liberalism or the "wellness syndrome" about it, its something I'm ambivalent about to be honest because I would agree that there's a definite "neo-liberal character" and it can make a lot of "heat and no light" or constant activity requisite as means and end but at once I'm very aware there's one life to live, try and make it a good one and often those who have acted in line with what is criticised as the neo-liberal character go manage to live pretty good lives, ie healthy, physically fit, networked etc. etc. Maybe its balance? I'm not sure.

Also, and I suppose this relates to how extensive it is, but does it all sound a little dissociated from emotions per se? I can say that my cognitive style can make it resilient to stress and crisis but I also think that it means I'm pretty distant sometimes, someone I know talked to me about how my preferred cognitive style could be a consequence of slow burning traumas once and it was quite persuasive.

Are you wondering about this in your own case or in mine?

 

[/DG/]

I know I'm just tagged in this because of what it says in my profile, but I'll give a bit of my thoughts, as I'm probably one of the least Te people...and the least T person in general with TJ written in their profile.

I don't identify with many definitions of Te and I don't identify with certain definitions of judging. I am not a stereotypical TJ type. I am and have always been an extremely messy and disorganized person. I don't see a need to be overly neat and I am too lazy to be organized. On the big five, I always get what should roughly correlate with ISP, but I do not fit the bill as one. Whether or not I am mistyped, I can't say.

Part of the problem with this is that there are two definitions I've seen of Te and two of J/P.

The two Te definitions I've come across:

1. Te is organization and efficiency. This is the most common definition I've seen and the one I take the most issue with. Why? I feel as though it isn't a great opposite to Ti. Ti is often seen as pure logic. So then to me, this definition seems rather limiting.
2. Te is empiricism. This is a rare definition and one I have a bit more of an affinity for. If Ti is the mathematician (pure logic, making sense without the need to look externally), Te is the experimental scientist (logic from the external world). Ti has faith in "common sense," but Te knows that the real world often goes against what we assume.

One could argue that both of these definitions are not quite right and that the real definition takes aspects of the two. I think the main criticism of definition 2 is that people assert that the external functions are ways in which we seek to affect the world. So Te types seek to apply logic to the external world, Fe types seek to apply their emotions to the external world, etc. I can't say whether or not this is true.

Assuming definition 1 is the correct definition, I am likely not a Te type. Assuming definition 2 is correct, I might be a Te type.

VagrantFarce has a wonderfully broad explanation of Te in his view. His writings look at definition 1, but focus on the efficiency side. However, Virtual ghosts's is written in a more specific manner, and one I do not at all identify with.

I could write a bit on issues with P and J definitions, but maybe for another day.

 

[á´…eparted]

One thing I have noticed about Te (dominant Te in particular), is that the internal dialouge the user experiences isn't particuarly large. Further, that what is said rarely has much withheld. Is this accurate? Either way how does the brain-mouth filter work, and what kind of stuff regularly gets filtered?

 

[great_bay]

I have Te as my 5th function.

Te is empirical evidence. When I notice in a debate that people aren't posting their facts, I use Te.

 

[á´…eparted]

Oh another question (which I admit is kinda vauge). What's the deal with Te and privacy? I totally get that everyone needs it, but I have noticed Te likes to sort of fragment their life (particulalry social life) and block each part from the other. If anyone tries to reach over and ask or look at something else, they get mad. I get why because its a violation of peivacy, but... why make it private in the first place?

 

[EJCC]

Time to join the bullet-point party*. Here's how I'd phrase my decision-making process -- taking [MENTION=7254]Wind Up Rex[/MENTION]'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 [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.


*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:

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'm sure that ESTJs go through a similar but slightly modified process since they have Ne in that tert position.

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.

One thing I have noticed about Te (dominant Te in particular), is that the internal dialouge the user experiences isn't particuarly large. Further, that what is said rarely has much withheld. Is this accurate? Either way how does the brain-mouth filter work, and what kind of stuff regularly gets filtered?

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?"

Oh another question (which I admit is kinda vauge). What's the deal with Te and privacy? I totally get that everyone needs it, but I have noticed Te likes to sort of fragment their life (particulalry social life) and block each part from the other. If anyone tries to reach over and ask or look at something else, they get mad. I get why because its a violation of peivacy, but... why make it private in the first place?

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.

 

[uumlau]

With Ni dominant, the bullet points kind of disappear. Te isn't how I think, it's how I present information. Te takes all the Ni insights and organizes them into something coherent that might actually be of use.

When I think, it's way more free form. I think some people got a taste of that the couple of times I've been on Vent so far. My free-form thoughts are way different than what I typically present in a post on the forum.

It actually took me a while to figure out all the "tricks" I know for how to present information in a "Te way". The skills are not obvious. They arose from lots and lots of fumbled communications, and not only as a child, but as an adult.

 

[ZNP-TBA]

I notice a little more certitude with Te-users. I work in a professional environment (focus on medical technology) and it's fairly easy to tease out the Ti-users from the Te-users. Given the fact we are all geeky-techy people most of us are xxTx's. The certitude can be easily noticed when talking to colleagues. The Te user will say "Doing X accomplishes Y" in a matter of fact kind of way eliminating any kind of counter thinking to the point. We Ti users hypothesize more about it and say " If X, then Y, unless Z is occurring." Another way to put it is when troubleshooting an issue the Ti-users often speak in questions when thinking out loud and propose "In theory, bla bla bla" where as the Te-users are already doing testing before working that all out.

 

[EJCC]

I notice a little more certitude with Te-users. I work in a professional environment (focus on medical technology) and it's fairly easy to tease out the Ti-users from the Te-users. Given the fact we are all geeky-techy people most of us are xxTx's. The certitude can be easily noticed when talking to colleagues. The Te user will say "Doing X accomplishes Y" in a matter of fact kind of way eliminating any kind of counter thinking to the point. We Ti users hypothesize more about it and say " If X, then Y, unless Z is occurring." Another way to put it is when troubleshooting an issue the Ti-users often speak in questions when thinking out loud and propose "In theory, bla bla bla" where as the Te-users are already doing testing before working that all out.

This has been my experience too. Well said.

Interestingly, I think I notice this trend the most in tertiary Ti and Te users. For example, IxFJs getting very stuck in large quantities of minutia, and ExFPs aggressively positing "X DOES Y EVERY TIME".

 

[ceecee]

Oh another question (which I admit is kinda vauge). What's the deal with Te and privacy? I totally get that everyone needs it, but I have noticed Te likes to sort of fragment their life (particulalry social life) and block each part from the other. If anyone tries to reach over and ask or look at something else, they get mad. I get why because its a violation of peivacy, but... why make it private in the first place?

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.

 

[EJCC]

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.

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.

[MENTION=20829]Hard[/MENTION] 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

 

[Kullervo]

Te, especially in xxTJs, I associate with empiricism; the idea that everything which is real we can deduce through our senses, experience and experiment. The problem I have with that is time, and the realm of abstract concepts which cannot be proven/disproven in an empirical manner restrict this approach. It seems inflexible and short-sighted.

Te gets into conflict with Fe in that whereas Fe habitually categorises and organises people, and emotions, Te, bonded to Fi, does/will not. Te however attempts to do the same to problems and ideas in a way which to Fe is too "literal". Te does not take into account context, intent, and other factors Fe may be aware of, and rejects the reasoning of Ti as subjective.

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

 

[violet_crown]

Will touch on [MENTION=4945]EJCC[/MENTION]'s response momentarily. Lot of interesting stuff there.

One thing I have noticed about Te (dominant Te in particular), is that the internal dialouge the user experiences isn't particuarly large. Further, that what is said rarely has much withheld. Is this accurate? Either way how does the brain-mouth filter work, and what kind of stuff regularly gets filtered?

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.

Oh another question (which I admit is kinda vauge). What's the deal with Te and privacy? I totally get that everyone needs it, but I have noticed Te likes to sort of fragment their life (particulalry social life) and block each part from the other. If anyone tries to reach over and ask or look at something else, they get mad. I get why because its a violation of peivacy, but... why make it private in the first place?

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?

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.

[MENTION=20829]Hard[/MENTION] 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

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