Beta Ti = reason

[tcaudilllg]

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.

[Brilliand]

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

[tcaudilllg]

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.

[Not A Communist Shill]

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?

[tcaudilllg]

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)

[Not A Communist Shill]

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?

[tcaudilllg]

What do you think?

[Not A Communist Shill]

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

[tcaudilllg]

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.\"

[Not A Communist Shill]

No, I think you've misunderstood me somewhere.

[tcaudilllg]

Well it does them both.

[Not A Communist Shill]

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

[Brilliand]

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?

[Not A Communist Shill]

Why all the backslashes?

You are thinking in terms of reason?? Heaven forbid!

[Brilliand]

You are thinking in terms of reason?? Heaven forbid!

[UDP]

oh boy