Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: Beta Ti = reason

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Beta Ti = reason

    After reflection, I have observed that we most often use the word \"reason\" to describe movement towards or away from something. Given that Ti w/sensing (which I shorthand Ti(S)) observes movement, it would seem that the many \"flavors\" of movement which we are led to believe exist under the dual-type theory/parallel type theory/two-type theory/whatever are to be classified on basis of their roles as explanations for movement towards or away from something. For example, consider the weakening of the U.S. dollar. Weakening is of course a beta Se (Se(T)) phenomena, and money is gamma Te (Te(N)). What is the explanation given for the weakening? Time and time again, it is the movement of investors away from U.S. bonds on basis of reduced return on investment. (gamma Ni or Ni(T)) As the economic outlook clouds, investors move elsewhere. This is why ISTj is a strategist: to avert economic defeat, an LSI-LIE would reason, it is necessary to pump money into the dollar and therefore increase the rate of return. This in turn will draw investors back to U.S. bonds.

  2. #2
    Currently God Brilliand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Nevada
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    4,246
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    You've described how an ISTj-ENTj would reason... but couldn't every element similarly be a reason for something?



    LII-Ne

    "Come to think of it, there are already a million monkeys on a million typewriters, and the Usenet is NOTHING like Shakespeare!"
    - Blair Houghton

    Johari

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Yes but, in the Ti(S) case there is no other way to cognize of the variations. Honestly, Ti(N) types don\'t usually think in terms of reason, do we? We think \"this person did this because she\'s like this\"; we try to get away from the reasons themselves... something that has a clear reason doesn\'t warrant our attention. ISTjs always ask, \"what is the reason?\" Other Betas do, too.

    It explains why Beta Ti is so dry.

  4. #4
    Landlord of the Dog and Duck Subteigh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    EII-Ne Sp/So
    Posts
    14,943
    Mentioned
    243 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg View Post
    Yes but, in the Ti(S) case there is no other way to cognize of the variations. Honestly, Ti(N) types don\'t usually think in terms of reason, do we? We think \"this person did this because she\'s like this\"; we try to get away from the reasons themselves... something that has a clear reason doesn\'t warrant our attention. ISTjs always ask, \"what is the reason?\" Other Betas do, too.

    It explains why Beta Ti is so dry.
    Have you considered the effect that thinking has in a dialetic framework?

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Subterranean View Post
    Have you considered the effect that thinking has in a dialetic framework?
    What do you mean? Do you mean have I considered thinking at the EM level? Well it\\\\\\\'s apparently the effect that situation, even the existence of a thing has on something else.

    Consider hotelambush\\\'s case. He\\\'s a mathematically inclined LII, meaning he has an EM type of LIE. Functionally, Te(N):Ti(N) it would be variability: the quantitative nature of objects. This of course goes well with Ti(N):Te(N) mathematical laws. (I\'ll get back to you on how... tired)

  6. #6
    Landlord of the Dog and Duck Subteigh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    EII-Ne Sp/So
    Posts
    14,943
    Mentioned
    243 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg View Post
    What do you mean? Do you mean have I considered thinking at the EM level? Well it\\\\\\\'s apparently the effect that situation, even the existence of a thing has on something else.

    Consider hotelambush\\\'s case. He\\\'s a mathematically inclined LII, meaning he has an EM type of LIE. Functionally, Te(N):Ti(N) it would be variability: the quantitative nature of objects. This of course goes well with Ti(N):Te(N) mathematical laws. (I\'ll get back to you on how... tired)
    But what about the epistemological nature of quantitative assessment?

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    What do you think?

  8. #8
    Landlord of the Dog and Duck Subteigh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    EII-Ne Sp/So
    Posts
    14,943
    Mentioned
    243 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    I would argue that it is most definitely within the capabilities of a Ti(N).

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Whether a person has something or not? LOL. Whether they are rich or poor?

    \"Is the money there or not?\"

    \"It\'s not--\"

    \"Then it ain\'t gonna work.\"

  10. #10
    Landlord of the Dog and Duck Subteigh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    EII-Ne Sp/So
    Posts
    14,943
    Mentioned
    243 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    No, I think you've misunderstood me somewhere.

  11. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Well it does them both.

  12. #12
    Landlord of the Dog and Duck Subteigh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    EII-Ne Sp/So
    Posts
    14,943
    Mentioned
    243 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think it is theoretically capable of anything, would you agree?

  13. #13
    Currently God Brilliand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Nevada
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    4,246
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg View Post
    What do you mean? Do you mean have I considered thinking at the EM level? Well it\\\\\\\'s apparently the effect that situation, even the existence of a thing has on something else.

    Consider hotelambush\\\'s case. He\\\'s a mathematically inclined LII, meaning he has an EM type of LIE. Functionally, Te(N):Ti(N) it would be variability: the quantitative nature of objects. This of course goes well with Ti(N):Te(N) mathematical laws. (I\'ll get back to you on how... tired)
    Why all the backslashes?



    LII-Ne

    "Come to think of it, there are already a million monkeys on a million typewriters, and the Usenet is NOTHING like Shakespeare!"
    - Blair Houghton

    Johari

  14. #14
    Landlord of the Dog and Duck Subteigh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    EII-Ne Sp/So
    Posts
    14,943
    Mentioned
    243 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Brilliand View Post
    Why all the backslashes?
    You are thinking in terms of reason?? Heaven forbid!
    EII-Ne
    5w4 or 1w9 Sp/So

  15. #15
    Currently God Brilliand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Nevada
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    4,246
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Subterranean View Post
    You are thinking in terms of reason?? Heaven forbid!



    LII-Ne

    "Come to think of it, there are already a million monkeys on a million typewriters, and the Usenet is NOTHING like Shakespeare!"
    - Blair Houghton

    Johari

  16. #16
    UDP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    East Coast West Coast Dirty South
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    14,826
    Mentioned
    33 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    oh boy
    Pre-2013 post are written with incomplete understanding.

Posting Permissions

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