Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 42

Thread: A simple Te/Ti distinction "test"

  1. #1
    Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    10,853
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default A simple Te/Ti distinction "test"

    Ti>Te: "Ok it hasn't worked when applied in reality, despite many attempts, but it's still a great idea, and some day it will work!"
    Te>Ti: "If it hasn't worked when applied in reality so far, how can it be a great idea?"
    , LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
    Quote Originally Posted by implied
    gah you're like the shittiest ENTj ever!

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    TIM
    D-LSI-Ti 1w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    11,586
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    This sounds like Ti considering an idea as still being "the same" idea after being given a few (major or minor) tweaks to make it workable. And Te sees the flawed idea, "throws it out", and comes up with a "new one" that fixes the problems.

  3. #3
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Perhaps to the extent that a Fi type would hang on to a relationship/friendship that isn't working?
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  4. #4
    Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    10,853
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy
    Perhaps to the extent that a Fi type would hang on to a relationship/friendship that isn't working?
    Ouch.
    , LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
    Quote Originally Posted by implied
    gah you're like the shittiest ENTj ever!

  5. #5
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Yeah...

    But still, comparing Ti to Fi (and Te to Fe) helps understand the ways in which people with different values may see or understand the other axis.
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  6. #6
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    "I know things aren't working, but they will when the situation is different... when there's less stress, when we move in together, etc."

    I don't know, I'm talking out my ass right now.
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  7. #7
    aka-kitsune's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    966
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy
    Perhaps to the extent that a Fi type would hang on to a relationship/friendship that isn't working?
    Meh. I've certainly done that and I'm Fe>Fi. Seems more a matter of NF idealising in general.

    Just a bit of a question... when you socionics nerds all refer to say a "Ti" type, does this only include Ti ego-block types, or basically anywhere Ti>Te in the socion?
    socio: INFp - IEI
    ennea: 4w5 sp/sx

    **********

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Twain
    Only kings, presidents, editors, and people with tapeworms have the right to use the editorial 'we'.

  8. #8
    implied's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    7,750
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy
    "I know things aren't working, but they will when the situation is different... when there's less stress, when we move in together, etc."

    I don't know, I'm talking out my ass right now.
    you're using this as a Fi example?
    6w5 sx
    model Φ: -+0
    sloan - rcuei

  9. #9
    BLauritson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Bristol, England
    Posts
    979
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by aka-kitsune
    Quote Originally Posted by Joy
    Perhaps to the extent that a Fi type would hang on to a relationship/friendship that isn't working?
    Meh. I've certainly done that and I'm Fe>Fi. Seems more a matter of NF idealising in general.
    Probably not necessarily even that - I think any type can get locked into a bad relationship thinking it might get better. IME being in a relationship, or considering yourself to be in a relationship, can sometimes cloud your judgement about said relationship. I don't mean you personally, I mean anyone (certainly happened to me before now).

    Quote Originally Posted by aka-kitsune
    Just a bit of a question... when you socionics nerds all refer to say a "Ti" type, does this only include Ti ego-block types, or basically anywhere Ti>Te in the socion?
    I think it means Ti ego-block types, but I'm not entirely sure. Either that or Ti dominants. I think people will explicitly say Ti>Te though if they mean Ti>Te. Then again I could be wrong, so if anyone knows better, please feel free to correct me.
    ILI (Indescribable Lovemaking Inc.)
    5w4 so/sx

    "IP temperament! Because today's concerns are tomorrow's indifferences!"

    Lord Fnorgle's Domain - A slowly growing collection of music, poetry and literature.
    Stickam music performances

  10. #10
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by implied
    Quote Originally Posted by Joy
    "I know things aren't working, but they will when the situation is different... when there's less stress, when we move in together, etc."

    I don't know, I'm talking out my ass right now.
    you're using this as a Fi example?
    Not exactly. I was pointing out a possible flaw in the "Ti types hang on to ideas that don't work" theory. I'm not sure it correlates though. Like I said, I'm talking about my ass.
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  11. #11
    XoX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    4,407
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: A simple Te/Ti distinction "test"

    Quote Originally Posted by Expat
    Ti>Te: "Ok it hasn't worked when applied in reality, despite many attempts, but it's still a great idea, and some day it will work!"
    Te>Ti: "If it hasn't worked when applied in reality so far, how can it be a great idea?"
    The problem for me in this is that I don't agree with the concept "reality" as you put it. I'd rather use the word "context". If something has been tested and found not working it doesn't imply that it is a bad idea in "reality" but it is a bad idea in the context people tried to use it.

    Like if a big guy tries to wear very small clothes and finds out that the clothes don't fit should he conclude that clothes are a bad idea? Or if you try to wear a thick jacket in hot sunshine and dislike it should you conclude that thick jackets are a bad idea?

    In addition even if there currently aren't any contexts where an idea works it only means that the idea is bad in all currently known contexts. But in the future a new context might appear where the idea works and is good. To move further, if you take into account that "contexts" are not real but actually blurred dynamic ever changing configurations of reality and no static concept of "context" even really exists it would be weird to say that if an idea has failed in some specific situation at some arbitrary point in time would imply that it fails always and everywhere.

    So, well, interpret that

  12. #12
    Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    10,853
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: A simple Te/Ti distinction "test"

    Quote Originally Posted by XoX
    So, well, interpret that
    That was just an elaborate defense of the Ti>Te position, showing very poor understanding of Te.
    , LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
    Quote Originally Posted by implied
    gah you're like the shittiest ENTj ever!

  13. #13
    XoX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    4,407
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: A simple Te/Ti distinction "test"

    Quote Originally Posted by Expat
    Quote Originally Posted by XoX
    So, well, interpret that
    That was just an elaborate defense of the Ti>Te position, showing very poor understanding of Te.
    Umm..what makes it a "defense" or "poor understanding of Te"? That is just how I see the situation. I couldn't interpret whether that is Ti approach or not so I was asking for your opinion. I take it that you see it as a Ti approach.

  14. #14
    Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    10,853
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: A simple Te/Ti distinction "test"

    Quote Originally Posted by XoX
    Umm..what makes it a "defense" or "poor understanding of Te"? That is just how I see the situation. I couldn't interpret whether that is Ti approach or not so I was asking for your opinion. I take it that you see it as a Ti approach.
    You tried to neutralize the concept of "checking an idea against reality" by using a silly example, of the clothes etc. You are dismissing the very validity of using reality as a check on the usefulness of ideas, essentially saying that it doesn't matter since the very concept of "reality" is doubtful.

    Confidence in, and valuing for, Te is precisely knowing that not call cases will be as silly as the "clothes on the fat guy" example; to know that there will be situations where you have to reach the conclusion that, "right, this idea, the way it's formulated, simply doesn't work in realistic scenarios".

    The approach you defended is precisely that of communists who, despite the failure of communism to succeed in any one single example, still insist that it will work some day under the right circumstances (this is not an attack, it's just the best example that comes to my mind).
    , LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
    Quote Originally Posted by implied
    gah you're like the shittiest ENTj ever!

  15. #15
    XoX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    4,407
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: A simple Te/Ti distinction "test"

    Quote Originally Posted by Expat
    The approach you defended is precisely that of communists who, despite the failure of communism to succeed in any one single example, still insist that it will work some day under the right circumstances (this is not an attack, it's just the best example that comes to my mind).
    I don't think that is a good example of my position. I was aware of that connection at the time of writing but that is not what I meant.

  16. #16
    Logos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,406
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: A simple Te/Ti distinction "test"

    Quote Originally Posted by Expat
    Ti>Te: "Ok it hasn't worked when applied in reality, despite many attempts, but it's still a great idea, and some day it will work!"
    Te>Ti: "If it hasn't worked when applied in reality so far, how can it be a great idea?"
    The wording definitely hints at a Te bias (if not Gamma, especially considering LSE Thomas Edison), but that is only natural I suppose. Also, it does not really convey the static nature of Ti vs. the dynamic nature of Te. I think that the Ti-dom is not really concerned as much or to the same extent as the Te-dom about the idea working in reality. While the Ti-dom may indeed want their ideas to work in reality, their goal or emphasis is not so much what should or will work in reality, but the subjectively defined relationships that exists between these aspects of reality in terms of either or . So in that regard as well, the wording of the hypothetical already shows the slant towards the Te > Ti. Also, is the addition of "despite many attempts" necessary in the first section? That also seemingly slants the choices in favor of Te > Ti.
    "Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi
    Johari Box

  17. #17
    Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    10,853
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Fair enough. How would you write it from a Ti bias PoV?

    As for the Edison example, I think that his many attempts to find (say) a suitable lightbulb were actually following evidence that the idea, in principle, already worked; he just needed to find that which would work well. It sounds like a distinction without a difference, but knowing when "enough is enough" is precisely a sign of confidence in Te -- which does not mean being right, of course.
    , LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
    Quote Originally Posted by implied
    gah you're like the shittiest ENTj ever!

  18. #18
    snegledmaca's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    1,900
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: A simple Te/Ti distinction "test"

    Quote Originally Posted by Expat
    Ti>Te: "Ok it hasn't worked when applied in reality, despite many attempts, but it's still a great idea, and some day it will work!"
    Te>Ti: "If it hasn't worked when applied in reality so far, how can it be a great idea?"
    Personally, I think you're test works only in extreme cases. Normal people do both while passing no judgment on the idea itself, that is, find an idea and if it doesn't work try various permutations, alterations, variations of it, and if it still doesn't work try something else and "store" the idea in their memory. Actually, that's how nature functions as well, unused genes become recessive, but if circumstances change they can spring back to life.

    EDIT: Perhaps only for differentiating between and dominants.

    Quote Originally Posted by Expat
    Quote Originally Posted by XoX
    ...
    ...
    The approach you defended is precisely that of communists who, despite the failure of communism to succeed in any one single example, still insist that it will work some day under the right circumstances (this is not an attack, it's just the best example that comes to my mind).
    Well, hmmm, what makes you think you can predict the future? What if they are right? I mean, the best you can do is determine probability of them being correct, or incorrect. That is the problem with beliefs, you cannot predict the future. But I see where you are coming from, having been reasonable convinced something is not applicable in a given situation types work on finding something that will be applicable in a given situation while types work to find given situations where that something will be applicable. But if so, isn't this more of a tactics vs. strategist thing?

  19. #19
    Blaze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    5,725
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    dunno about this.

    seems to me that Ti always has to be tweaked since it's theoretical. if the theory is faulty then it's unreliable or invalid and has to be discarded. Ti provides a framework or a roadmap, not a recipe. the best theories have flexibility within themselves and serve to orient people not micromanage them.

    the Te part seems right. applications based, if it's not working try something else.

    ILE

    those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often

  20. #20

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: A simple Te/Ti distinction "test"

    Quote Originally Posted by Expat
    Ti>Te: "Ok it hasn't worked when applied in reality, despite many attempts, but it's still a great idea, and some day it will work!"
    Te>Ti: "If it hasn't worked when applied in reality so far, how can it be a great idea?"
    This is a good and concise way of illustrating the differences -- at least if applied to INTjs and INTps, where we constantly find that INTjs almost always tend to problematize the idea of a "reality" against which hypotheses can and should be tested. ENTjs and INTps tend to agree on this. They share the same basic scientific perspective, and they both tend to find the idea of an existing objective reality rather unproblematic and attractive, whereas INTjs relativize such notions. ENTps are somewhat harder to put in either category, and how well it works for other types I am even less sure of.

  21. #21
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,375
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: A simple Te/Ti distinction "test"

    Quote Originally Posted by Expat
    Ti>Te: "Ok it hasn't worked when applied in reality, despite many attempts, but it's still a great idea, and some day it will work!"
    So that's where all the useless crap comes from.

  22. #22
    Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    10,853
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: A simple Te/Ti distinction "test"

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    Personally, I think you're test works only in extreme cases.
    That's why I called it a "test" between quotes -- it's not supposed to be a realistic exact example, but an indication of extreme opposites.

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    Well, hmmm, what makes you think you can predict the future? What if they are right? I mean, the best you can do is determine probability of them being correct, or incorrect. That is the problem with beliefs, you cannot predict the future. But I see where you are coming from, having been reasonable convinced something is not applicable in a given situation types work on finding something that will be applicable in a given situation while types work to find given situations where that something will be applicable. But if so, isn't this more of a tactics vs. strategist thing?
    There is no absolute "right" and "wrong" -- of course Te>Ti types may well dismiss ideas to early. The point is simply, on which side are you more likely to find yourself? That is the issue. It's not about the Te>Ti position being always right and the Ti>Te one being always wrong, although my phrasing may have given this impression.
    , LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
    Quote Originally Posted by implied
    gah you're like the shittiest ENTj ever!

  23. #23
    Logos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,406
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: A simple Te/Ti distinction "test"

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarno
    Quote Originally Posted by Expat
    Ti>Te: "Ok it hasn't worked when applied in reality, despite many attempts, but it's still a great idea, and some day it will work!"
    So that's where all the useless crap comes from.
    See signature. :wink:

    Quote Originally Posted by Expat
    That's why I called it a "test" between quotes -- it's not supposed to be a realistic exact example, but an indication of extreme opposites.

    There is no absolute "right" and "wrong" -- of course Te>Ti types may well dismiss ideas to early. The point is simply, on which side are you more likely to find yourself? That is the issue. It's not about the Te>Ti position being always right and the Ti>Te one being always wrong, although my phrasing may have given this impression.
    But if they are maxim extremes, then I am likely not to find myself identifying with either of them.

    Re Expat: A further problem is that the Te>Ti option seems to be responding to an idea of the Ti>Te option (though I am sure the problem would still persist if their ordering was reversed), which makes it seem like a dialogue (though you could always choose to construct it in such a fashion), so it would be best structured as if the two choices were responding to [Idea A]. But it would not be case of Ti>Te agreeing or Te>Ti disagreeing with Idea A, but more likely what aspect or why Te>Ti & Ti>Te find problematic or beneficial (perhaps both should be taken considered to take the positivst/negativist dichotomy into account) about [Idea A].

    Ti>Te:
    - "Why would anyone consider [Idea A] a great idea if it does not make any rational sense?"
    - "[Idea A] makes perfectly logical sense, how can it not be a great idea?"
    - "[Idea A] may not work now, but maybe later, so it is an interesting idea to entertain."

    Te>Ti:
    - "If [Idea A] has not worked when applied in reality so far, how can it be a great idea?"
    - "[Idea A] actually works well, how can it not be a great idea?"
    - "[Idea A] does not work now, so it is not an idea worth entertaining at this time."
    "Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi
    Johari Box

  24. #24
    aka-kitsune's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    966
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think the particular examples of "Ti vs Te" only work in a complete vacuum anyway. With some added to the mix, there is more sense that a theory is actually "workable" in reality and may be applied in *some* particular optimum condition (ie: Edison).

    I certainly don't think Edison was flogging away in a purely T manner to make his idea work. He had to have some intuitive concept/principle that he saw in his mind connecting the elements (no pun intended) of harnessing the electricity.
    socio: INFp - IEI
    ennea: 4w5 sp/sx

    **********

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Twain
    Only kings, presidents, editors, and people with tapeworms have the right to use the editorial 'we'.

  25. #25
    XoX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    4,407
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: A simple Te/Ti distinction "test"

    Quote Originally Posted by Logos
    Te>Ti:
    - "[Idea A] actually works well, how can it not be a great idea?"
    I don't know if anyone can say that an idea that "works well" is not a good idea. What sense would that make. Perhaps the Te and Ti difference is more about defining what "works well" means.

  26. #26
    ...been here longer than the fucking monarchy Ezra's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    UK
    TIM
    SLE-Ti
    Posts
    9,169
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    If this is remotely accurate or reflective of any kind of worthy opinion, I am Te-valuing.
    Ideas don't determine who's right. Power determines who's right. And I have the power. So I'm right.

  27. #27
    Logos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,406
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: A simple Te/Ti distinction "test"

    Quote Originally Posted by XoX
    Quote Originally Posted by Logos
    Te>Ti:
    - "[Idea A] actually works well, how can it not be a great idea?"
    I don't know if anyone can say that an idea that "works well" is not a good idea. What sense would that make. Perhaps the Te and Ti difference is more about defining what "works well" means.
    Efficiently in reality.
    "Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi
    Johari Box

  28. #28
    Creepy-bg

    Default Re: A simple Te/Ti distinction "test"

    Quote Originally Posted by XoX
    Quote Originally Posted by Logos
    Te>Ti:
    - "[Idea A] actually works well, how can it not be a great idea?"
    I don't know if anyone can say that an idea that "works well" is not a good idea.

  29. #29
    Snomunegot munenori2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Kansas
    TIM
    Introvert sp/sx
    Posts
    7,739
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy
    Perhaps to the extent that a Fi type would hang on to a relationship/friendship that isn't working?
    That's a hilarious parallel. If that's in any way related to the Ti>Te example Expat gave, then I feel like I might have actually learned something. I wonder if it would be all about the potential.
    Moonlight will fall
    Winter will end
    Harvest will come
    Your heart will mend

  30. #30
    Snomunegot munenori2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Kansas
    TIM
    Introvert sp/sx
    Posts
    7,739
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: A simple Te/Ti distinction "test"

    Quote Originally Posted by Bionicgoat
    Quote Originally Posted by XoX
    Quote Originally Posted by Logos
    Te>Ti:
    - "[Idea A] actually works well, how can it not be a great idea?"
    I don't know if anyone can say that an idea that "works well" is not a good idea.
    Yeeeeouch.
    Moonlight will fall
    Winter will end
    Harvest will come
    Your heart will mend

  31. #31
    The Iniquitous inumbra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    954
    Posts
    5,989
    Mentioned
    70 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Te and Ti both suck.
    Last edited by inumbra; 07-30-2008 at 03:06 AM.

  32. #32

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Loki
    So...

    Te>>Ti... the danger is dismissing something that might actually be a valuable idea (with some tweaking) because it doesn't appear to work in a relavent context.

    Ti>>Te... the danger is continuing to try something that isn't going to work in any context (with any amount of tweaking) because it seems really nice in theory.
    Nope.
    ...the human race will disappear. Other races will appear and disappear in turn. The sky will become icy and void, pierced by the feeble light of half-dead stars. Which will also disappear. Everything will disappear. And what human beings do is just as free of sense as the free motion of elementary particles. Good, evil, morality, feelings? Pure 'Victorian fictions'.

    INTp

  33. #33
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,631
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I am not sure if this idea is workable. Something that just works isn't a great idea. Something that looks good on paper and doesn't work isn't a great idea. Something that works with perfect efficiency and is architectured with a fantastic design is a great idea, universally speaking.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  34. #34
    escaping anndelise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    WA
    TIM
    IEE 649 sx/sp cp
    Posts
    6,330
    Mentioned
    209 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I don't believe that the original quotes are particularly realistic.
    One example of why I think that:
    I posted something a while back showing the essence of an idea I had used to help me solve a problem. The idea worked.
    Two self proclaimed and generally accepted as Te types (expat and smilingeyes) dismissed it as not being theoretically correct and therefore wouldn't work.
    Both ignored that despite it's theoretic correctness or lack thereof, the implementation of the idea DID indeed work.

    (btw, it continues to work for me when I'm capable of applying aspects of it...despite their claim that it can't/won't work)

    so basically, even Te ego types get stuck on theory>practical/reality
    IEE 649 sx/sp cp

  35. #35
    ...been here longer than the fucking monarchy Ezra's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    UK
    TIM
    SLE-Ti
    Posts
    9,169
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG
    I am not sure if this idea is workable. Something that just works isn't a great idea. Something that looks good on paper and doesn't work isn't a great idea. Something that works with perfect efficiency and is architectured with a fantastic design is a great idea, universally speaking.
    Agreed.

    I certainly don't think that if something doesn't work it can be a great idea.
    Ideas don't determine who's right. Power determines who's right. And I have the power. So I'm right.

  36. #36
    reyn_til_runa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    new jersey
    Posts
    1,009
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: A simple Te/Ti distinction "test"

    Quote Originally Posted by Expat
    Ti>Te: "Ok it hasn't worked when applied in reality, despite many attempts, but it's still a great idea, and some day it will work!"
    is it necessary to impose the value of time on Ti?
    Te>Ti: "If it hasn't worked when applied in reality so far, how can it be a great idea?"
    same question (for Te)

    i am pretty sure i value Te>Ti, but i wouldn't say these statements make that obvious.
    there are multiple layers of analysis. if theres an actual problem to solve in the real world, i know that in that external realm, selection /development of ideas has to be all about what works. but in order to get to that point, i see Ti as helping with structurally relating various parts of the problem to each other. Ti seems necessary to define the problem, whereas Te seems necessary to solve it. but of course there is value in solving hypothetical problems in your mind, never applying "hard" reality, just for the fun of it.
    whenever the dog and i see each other we both stop where we are. we regard each other with a mixture of sadness and suspicion and then we feign indifference.

    Jerry, The Zoo Story by Edward Albee

  37. #37
    I'm back, assholes! Herzy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    TIM
    SLE
    Posts
    5,098
    Mentioned
    44 Post(s)
    Tagged
    7 Thread(s)

    Default Re: A simple Te/Ti distinction "test"

    Quote Originally Posted by Expat
    Ti>Te: "Ok it hasn't worked when applied in reality, despite many attempts, but it's still a great idea, and some day it will work!"
    Te>Ti: "If it hasn't worked when applied in reality so far, how can it be a great idea?"
    Well then, I must be a type if this were true.
    , Se-sub
    8w8-3w8-7w8 sx/sx

  38. #38
    RSV3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    190
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: A simple Te/Ti distinction "test"

    Quote Originally Posted by Expat
    Ti>Te: "Ok it hasn't worked when applied in reality, despite many attempts, but it's still a great idea, and some day it will work!"
    Te>Ti: "If it hasn't worked when applied in reality so far, how can it be a great idea?"
    This test is accurate in my case. I'm always coming up wtih ideas that often aren't viable in the real world. Yet, I continue believing they're amazing ideas, and just store them on the "shelf" in hopes of using them at some later date. My Ti viewpoint definitely values the idea over the real world applicability.

  39. #39
    RSV3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    190
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Loki
    So...

    Te>>Ti... the danger is dismissing something that might actually be a valuable idea (with some tweaking) because it doesn't appear to work in a relavent context.

    Ti>>Te... the danger is continuing to try something that isn't going to work in any context (with any amount of tweaking) because it seems really nice in theory.


    & (highly theoretical)
    |
    |
    |
    |
    |
    |
    |
    & ------------------------- & (highly empirical)

    I think I value more.
    I definitely agree that Ti-Ne is theoretical > empirical. Once I come up with a theory, I'll wilfully ignore contradictory empirical evidence (if its relatively minor) because if the theory is logical, it should be valid. (And yes, I realize how idiotic it is to ignore, or conveniently fail to address, contradictory empirical evidence, but I guess that's just my nature.) But I would disagree with Ti representing a danger of continuing to work on an inpractical project. Rather I would say that after discovering the infeasability of the idea in the real world, I would suspend work on it while continuing to fully believe in its validity and future potential (if that makes any sense).

  40. #40
    Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    10,853
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by anndelise
    I don't believe that the original quotes are particularly realistic.
    They're not supposed to be. The idea transmitted is what counts, but in Duesseldorf I realized that my tests or so-called tests (like this one) are flawed as being too Ni-biased. Your comment was an example of Si>Ni bias.

    Quote Originally Posted by anndelise
    so basically, even Te ego types get stuck on theory>practical/reality
    Anything can happen to anyone.

    And again, that is not the point of such "tests" -- it is to see, hmm, on which side am I more likely to find myself in?

    Any person who would NEVER have Te>Ti moments or Ti>Te moments should be locked up as a lunatic.

    That is despite my phrasing, as such, being also flawed.
    , LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
    Quote Originally Posted by implied
    gah you're like the shittiest ENTj ever!

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •