Te/Ti Let's clear things up

[Beautiful sky]

My boss is Ti he will create a system after a system for doing things and won't care one bit about my own system because his system is superior always to my own way of doing something. He is an absolute Czar of systems, he doesn't give two cents about what methods (Te) need to be employed within a system he creates to make it run efficiently (Te) or productively (Te) and will usually not do any of the small and mundane work (Te) within the system/ways of doing something (Ti) that he creates; so take for example the mail; at my work place, he create a system: the mail will be opened by him and then will be divided, by him to the other departments. Now the system that he creates needs work (Te); after a week of doing the work, he falls lazy and behind on the work not taking care of opening the mail and disbursing it to the different departments; Te is the person who would step in and take care of the routine task of meticulously opening the mail and handing it to different departments with lots of care and attention -day after day after day, with happiness and gladness; while Ti person would fall lazy and drop the method, but will get very upset if someone contradicts his system or try to change it; only Ti can evaluate their own system of doing things, they will accept suggestions, but instead of changing the methods within the system, as in handing off duties to someone else who will take care of the mundane Te related work and tasks, Ti will create another system, this other system will be: Office manager (another person involved in the new system) will take care of opening the mail and disbursing it. Again, Ti doesn't care about managing mundane task, so if office manager falls behind on the work then Te will not enforce a policy to fire or rehire a new office manager with better workability, instead will create another system or will add system upon system like, shared duty of opening the mail between office manager and receptionist; what happens with Ti is that all of these systems without Te (combining and efficiency, productivity and working) will not work well unless they get lucky and create a system and hire a Te worker to take care of the work that needs to get done because they won't do it or they will fall short and fall behind. Now Si in service of Te sometime looks like Ti but it isn't because even though SiTe (SLI) will get lazy and bored, given a task or project they really like, they will do meticulous and good strong work at it. My Ti boss will go wrong when he assumes that the customer would have liked him to use the best system/way of handling the care of his patient despite getting consent so will sometimes F up and not get the proper consent to do a procedure because he instituted a system (the best way of doing something) in assumption that that is the best way of going about doing it -this can backfire on Ti people because not everyone sees their way as the best way and their actions can cause them to move on assumptions that they are right and are doing the best thing possible. We've had customers who said, "look, you are the professional here, but your way is not the best way for me." But my boss didn't think about it that way, he is the system maker, he does or follows a protocol of systems in his own mind that makes sense for the recourse or action. This is why Ti will fail to consider other people's ways only going by their own way, which to others, especially other Irrational types, seems too rigid, too strict, nonsense, etc.

Te enjoys looking at the details of the task while keeping the big picture in mind; Ti keeps a big picture in mind and does not do or even conveniently abandons small tasks. Organization is Te; Ti is not involved in the internal workings of order and only concentrates on the external perameters of a task.

I have noticed that with Te, they organize my thoughts very well while if I have scattered and tidbit thoughts, a Ti will ask me to organize them first before addressing them.

Te likes to tell people how to do things or they employe the best method in doing something themselves, called algorythmic thinking; if you are annoyed by people telling you how to do something then you probably do not value Te. If you think you are a Te type then you would most likely like being told how the best way to do something is because you ignore Ti you don't take it into account so you may miss a system:

Example, My dual cousin is great at maticulous work. When the floor guys came in to install the new tile, she couldn't figure out the system (the way they should go about in doing the work). I told her the steps or the system which was:

Example of Ti in work... So Ti identifys the system or the steps/ways but doesn't actually do the work; Te does the work within the system.
1. Have them lay the tile.
2. Have them grout.
3. Have them seal the grout.
4. Cover the floors and do the other small work that needs to get done.

Her SiTe husband got to her before I did so this is how the work went without my Ti involvement:

1. They lay the tile.
2. They grouted the tile.
3. They put up the appliances and covered part of the tiles that now can not be reached to seal. -They F-d up here
4. The floor was not covered to do the other work around the home... -They F-d up here again

SUCH A BAD SYSTEM HER HUSBAND IMPLIMENTED...WHY? BECAUSE HE'S SiTe....ahhh. This F-up caused double the work because the grout got damaged by the use of a bad system in doing something.

Anyone else have good examples of Ti/Te?

[717495]

Ti seems to deconstruct logic and facts to better itself in some construct, as though it were to be translated and fit into a larger scheme, to where it can no longer or have difficulty being rephrased in back in English and details, where as Te seems to always keep these facts in mind, and keeping them separate, without letting them merge into some larger more abstract notion or language. When Ti comes up, it's sort of the pop-up that asks "are you sure you want to merge? this will make 0fisherun4xo.lol run faster but the code will no longer be accessible."

In work, the purpose of such Te in dominance is to have these factoids and keep them in mind in aiding one's mind focus on efficiency, where as a Ti dominant has some specific purpose in mind for the transformation and reconfiguration of information to a system, in hope that one doesn't have to focus their mind to efficiency. They're both potentially productive.

[Beautiful sky]

Here's another really good example:

In building a home; Ti will oversee the division of the labor amongst professionals. Keeps on top of the professionals that do the work, not the work and how it's being done.

Te will oversee the details of the plans and keep on top of the details of the work not on top of the professionals that do the work...will frequently discuss what is being done to get things done.

This is why Te always produces a better result (and higher standards) then Ti in my opinion.

[717495]

Yes, and of course in your example of Ti it should be noted that there is indeed a process going on, but it's a lot more internal, and especially able to be internalized, which triggers that "it's ok, everything is working well" on the inside. "It fits with code and standard; it fits my internal expectations of what makes sense."

My LSI friend wouldn't even care if various technicalities don't work out well, she will be glad that it all is sorted out between the conglomeration and everything finally makes sense, and she doesn't have to deal with it any more. She'll be glad that is wasn't entirely negative as a whole. When you get to her own art and design however, that's more a sensorial thing, and she will get all over it to make sure it's visually perfect and up to expectation, but that the technicalities are fine on the inside and she doesn't have to think about all of the ways to make it easier, which in turn makes it harder for her to focus. She tries not to worry about efficiency basically, she'd rather use as many resources as she can to get it right, and stick to a basic outline (which is the accepted Ti system of operation). Even if I propose a more efficient solution, she will reject it. If she does have to do it herself, she won't want to teach anyone, she'd rather get it over with and not pay heed to this "outer" affair that doesn't involve her activity of focus.

Te-PoLR is one of the most annoying things I've come into contact with. My LSI friend here is married to an IEI, and often I try to make sense of things using facts and occurrences, and he will try to read into the background of any situation and say if it makes sense according to his perception of how things are supposed to go. So basically "No that doesn't make sense, can't you see?" and me, "Uh, wut? I see perfectly. You seem to be blind." And him, "Oh yeah, well you seem to be stupid." Then me basically having the feeling that talking to this person is completely useless and he misses really key defining details that change everything in perspective, and he'll just go on with his wacky ideas. A lot of IEIs on this forum, and for some reason I wouldn't be surprised if you have no idea what I'm talking about. You probably see it more from the reject-loser perception of Fe-PoLR shinning in dark rust from the other side.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

Te-PoLR is one of the most annoying things I've come into contact with. My LSI friend here is married to an IEI, and often I try to make sense of things using facts and occurrences, and he will try to read into the background of any situation and say if it makes sense according to his perception of how things are supposed to go. So basically "No that doesn't make sense, can't you see?" and me, "Uh, wut? I see perfectly. You seem to be blind." And him, "Oh yeah, well you seem to be stupid." Then me basically having the feeling that talking to this person is completely useless and he misses really key defining details that change everything in perspective, and he'll just go on with his wacky ideas. A lot of IEIs on this forum, and for some reason I wouldn't be surprised if you have no idea what I'm talking about. You probably see it more from the reject-loser perception of Fe-PoLR shinning in dark rust from the other side.

Oh go fuck yourself polikujm. =D

[717495]

And he doesn't give as good of advice as some of you IEI.

[Beautiful sky]

True that if you are convincing enough you can get Ti to change to another system of doing things, especially if you show them Te, the most effective and productive new idea. I guess what you're doing is really convincing them to impliment a new system, not impliment a new method.

[717495]

Yes I believe I have, or I have tried with some amount of success. I would like to think that both T dominants like to keep a decent record of useful methods and tricks they pick up or learn from others, especially related to their work or interests. Though for Ti's it sounds like "okay, this is totally my new thing now. awesome. now what can I do with this?" and for Te's it's more like "hey look it worked. let's make sure this and this adjust, and this is good... yata yata," often seem like they're not even interested in the actual thing and what it does, in as much as it will help them continue with the other things and they'll remember to come back to it, and it might bring some inspiration for ideas later. And I have the same problem with this too, "No I am thankful that you showed me, it's just I thought we had something going on here, now is not the time." With Ti's you more likely have to show them at the right time so they can fully appreciate it.

You probably see it more from the reject-loser perception of Fe-PoLR shinning in dark rust from the other side.

Actually, more from the "You should have seen this already, I shouldn't have to tell you. I'm so good at reading into people and their cues, and you are pathetic" perspective.

[redbaron]

Te-PoLR is one of the most annoying things I've come into contact with. My LSI friend here is married to an IEI, and often I try to make sense of things using facts and occurrences, and he will try to read into the background of any situation and say if it makes sense according to his perception of how things are supposed to go. So basically "No that doesn't make sense, can't you see?" and me, "Uh, wut? I see perfectly. You seem to be blind." And him, "Oh yeah, well you seem to be stupid." Then me basically having the feeling that talking to this person is completely useless and he misses really key defining details that change everything in perspective, and he'll just go on with his wacky ideas. A lot of IEIs on this forum, and for some reason I wouldn't be surprised if you have no idea what I'm talking about. You probably see it more from the reject-loser perception of Fe-PoLR shinning in dark rust from the other side.

[Gilly]

So apparently Maritsa is the only EII who hates Te.

Get it right, bitch: you're EIE.

[Gilly]

I love how poli comes in and says essentially "I hate it when x people behave stupidly. I come in with truth and they are like "What?" so I say it again and they go "You're dumb." I hate stupid people."

[jughead]

Yeah that was a poorly elucidated example, but Maritsa's was suprisingly spot on in my own expirience, regardless of her actual type unless you are saying she completely got Ti/Te backward which I think is obviously not the case.
However I THINK I know what pol is saying but:
Thats probably half the problem I have with ILI but it's probably the same with IEI... aren't IEI's at least famous for being wishy washy and Ni dominant in general? So one values Te and the other Ti so you perplex one another with Ti/Te inherent value differences yet you are both using Ni and thus understand that part and see how that can be annoying.

[Marie84]

"look, you are the professional here, but your way is not the best way for me."

Translation: "You're knowledge is pointless to me (Te), since what's important is what makes sense (Ti). Your information (Te) might not even be [what I see as] correct (Ti)"

So apparently Maritsa is the only EII who hates Te.

Get it right, bitch: you're EIE.

yes

[Blaze]

So apparently Maritsa is the only EII who hates Te.

where did you get that? her first post seems to be elevating Te above Ti. then she talks about how a Ti person would supervise the professional while the Te person would supervise the work.

also Ti and Te go hand in hand anyway. it's only a question of where the emphasis is most effectively applied. Ti is good when there is a lot of seemingly unrelated information and no one knows where to start. Te is good when there's already systems in place and you can focus on specific tasks.

[Beautiful sky]

Translation: "You're knowledge is pointless to me (Te), since what's important is what makes sense (Ti). Your information (Te) might not even be [what I see as] correct (Ti)"



yes

This is why I think I don't value you as any EII. EII as Aushra explained are very personable, they strive to establish relations with lots of people and you can see the comparison by the number of friends I have vrs the ones you have...Fi is not about "close or far" relations...get it right missy.

I love Te and you can't even understand what it is anyway.

We are not shy "the easily tying relations, which are attained the mutual sympathy, easily entering the new groups of people."

Activity in the sense of typing is not an indication of E/I
Ne is about possiblities...how do you activate your dual's Ne, can you offer any examples? NO
and furthermore you don't have any Se PoLR or display of it in any way to show for as evidence of your self proclaimed BS typing of you as EII type...people like you F UP a perfectly good system of socionics. Propegation of ideas is a function of Ne, do you even read I wonder? What new idea have you come across that with all likelyhood you would propegate?...

My lack of Te, dear, manifests in not being organized about my thoughts and sending multiple emails out without clear method of how I should organzie my thought...Te being methodical does that very well for me, but I can't very well expect my dear cousin to be pulled away from her life to baby sit me nor would I ever put that burden upon her because that's not right.

[Beautiful sky]

Translation: "You're knowledge is pointless to me (Te), since what's important is what makes sense (Ti). Your information (Te) might not even be [what I see as] correct (Ti)"



yes

TRY READING:

Dostoyevsky.
Characteristic of ethics- intuitive intro-Tim
Model A

Block [EGO].
Skillfully adjusts herself to close relations with other people. (It is confident, what feelings of sympathy - the antipathies, which one person calls in another (), are determined by the internal qualities of man (); therefore are formed these qualities.) The fact that people want to acquire some by thing, is also more greatly determined by its internal qualities, but not by exterior view. Exterior view, form of both the object and the subject must not strike, they must be faster already imperceptible and in this case - by maximally qualitative. Spiritual qualities of man - basic means of action on other people. But such means of action can be gifts, moreover the gifts, in internal qualities of which do not appear the doubts. He knows, what its close people want and what do not want, to whom and why they sympathize with, to whom they do not sympathize with. It is always capable to be dismantled at the present and apparent feelings of people.

It interest the moral aspect of the culture of man - honesty, conscientiousness, merit, culture. Although it starts new acquaintances easily, the circle of interests is usually limited by close and familiar people. It loves them, it survives for them. [my circle is limited, but I'm always happy to make new friends...something that the self proclaimed EII wannabe's are not doing here. ]

This usually quiet people, which in the new company more greatly keep silent and observe, without manifesting special activity. But them it is not possible to name too constrained, because they see, as they include others, and they know as this relation to improve. Excellent illustration to this - prince [Myshkin] from novel Of [f].[Dostoevskogo] “idiot”, Ales [Karamazov] or the main hero “of adolescent”. From one side - modest, calm, while with another - the easily tying relations, which are attained the mutual sympathy, easily entering the new groups of people.

Relations with the people they regulate, draw it nearer itself or remove not so much in a word, as by view and by intonation. The tension in the voice, which does not frequently completely correspond so that at this time they speak, almost each it returns to “its place”. Even by their taciturn presence are capable of improving, of warming or - vice versa - of cooling the psychological climate spaces, in which they are located.

Their its close in region feelings to the surrounding people it corrects categorically, it requires strictly selective relations. This especially satisfactorily influences its [duala] OF LOGICO- SENSORY [EKSTRATIMA] ([SHTIRLITS]), which, without having a possibility to critically evaluate the ethics of other people, usually holds soul unbuttoned, make too many concessions, as a result of which generally it can be dissuaded in the people and become sullen misanthrope.

Block ID. [Samopodchinenie], mutual anxiety, aid by other
General, ETHICS- INTUITIVE intro-Tim its emotions completely identifies with the emotions of another person. With the sad it and itself is sad, with the merry - oars. By its emotions it seemingly enters into the mood of other, identifies itself, its state with the emotional state of other. It follows the emotions of others, is subordinated to the emotions of others and never it ties its emotions. Its participation in other demonstrates, showing its presence and unique emotional dying down.

However, it is desirable to be occupied not by any person, but by fact, to emotions of whom it is possible to entrust, emotions of which are worthy its participation, but itself to make this selection it is not capable. Is necessary correction [SHTIRLITSA], which the emotional life of people examines better than Dostoyevsky, it is more objective. And therefore it saves it from the dispersion of its forces to the empty mutual anxiety with all. In this case the impression can be created, that [SHTIRLITS] is jealous its partner, although in reality it him only protects from the participation in the emotional life of surface people, from the possible troubles.

How Dostoyevsky is obtained information about the state of another person? On the mimicry, the intonation, the depression. General emotional tone feels. And when intonations do not correspond to words, it hears only intonation, and not word.
Desiring to help man, to be for it useful, Tdies, it attempts to catch its view, he asks, why it today such, which happened. It enters in the mountain of the second, it sympathizes to it, appears identical emotional state and possibility of contact. When it is possible to enter “into unison”, between themselves and others it does not see difference, its its own physical state disappears, disappears a feeling of its own body. It does not place to itself the task of cheering up other. It helps by understanding and by sympathy.

The search for the reason for depression, melancholy, fear, depression and any other negative emotion goes after this. Here when people so to it issue entire “their”, he feels itself more than sometimes, in its plate. And he tries to comfort, to cheer up, to bring to flat, calm state, to even mood. Generally - it is shameful to pass past the depressed person. If this is even completely strange person on the street. And if this occurs because of the vital fuss, unpleasant sediment remains on the soul.

Demonstration “I am ready by you to study” it occurs as the demonstration of my complete calmness, passiveness, confidence to other. He is constantly confident, that by others it is necessary to calm, flat, serene. It is desirable to be as if compress, which others can apply to its wounds.

It is desirable so that there would be no people, in attitude of which they fulfill this role, too much, so that these would be valuable, worthy people. But to live completely without the people, by which it is possible to be anxious, it cannot. By properly necessary it feels itself only in such situations. Only because of them it revives, it becomes able-bodied and “[emotsiosposobnym]”. Without the subordination of its emotions to the emotions of other in it would not be formed so easily spiritual [vozbuzhdennost], necessary for the manifestation of any activity, but that it is more for the manifestation of the active position in the life.

Although ETHICS- INTUITIVE intro-Tim is ready to be occupied gorem (advance repair train, adreptrain) of each person, it is very sensitive to the feeling of faithfulness, which to it is tested others. It falls into the very difficult situation, when people, to which it appeared a feeling of participation and faithfulness, behave ambiguously, as this was, for example, in prince [Myshkina] with The [nastasey] [Filippovnoy], in attitude of whom he felt itself obliged, although it loved other.

[SHTIRLITS], because of its special information about constancy and inconstancy of emotions, about faithfulness and inaccuracy of people, sifts the contingent of people, in which its [dual] can and must take emotional part.

[Marie84]

Your condescension and butchery of Model A will not alter that I see everything you say, act and value as being correlated with EIE
Though you're free to live with whatever guise you choose, but I will still call you out on inaccurate information as I see it

[Beautiful sky]

Your condescension and butchery of Model A will not alter that I see everything you say, act and value as being correlated with EIE
Though you're free to live with whatever guise you choose, but I will still call you out on inaccurate information as I see it

Perhapse to see you may need to have vision or ears or to be able to hear and comprehend or see and comprehend...any mutiple fascets should do.

What's immature is not reading and trying to comprehend the information offered to you, even if I get stuck in trivial matters, at least I obtain an open mind for new information, seems like unlike you.

[Logos]

So, Maritsa, what exactly have you cleared up about Te/Ti?

[Beautiful sky]

So, Maritsa, what exactly have you cleared up about Te/Ti?

Te organizes external information
Ti does not organize external information; Ti people amaze me when they tell me to organize my desk or organize my thoughts, they take no initiative in organizing things of external world in my observation. They are far too concerned with eliminating contridictions and systematizing things inside their own head to focus on external stuff.

[Logos]

Te organizes external information
Ti does not organize external information; Ti people amaze me when they tell me to organize my desk or organize my thoughts, they take no initiative in organizing things of external world in my observation. They are far too concerned with eliminating contridictions and systematizing things inside their own head to focus on external stuff.

That may be Ti + Ne, but not Ti + Se. So are you clearing or boggling things up?

[Beautiful sky]

That may be Ti + Ne, but not Ti + Se. So are you clearing or boggling things up?

That would be Ti + Se...why not?

[Krig the Viking]

Te organizes external information
Ti does not organize external information; Ti people amaze me when they tell me to organize my desk or organize my thoughts, they take no initiative in organizing things of external world in my observation. They are far too concerned with eliminating contridictions and systematizing things inside their own head to focus on external stuff.

Ti + Se organizes external information, Ti + Ne organizes internal information. Se is defined as "external statics of objects", which is to say, explicit, external information about the more permanent, unchanging details of objects and people in the world. Ti, when combined with Se, sorts and organizes the world's explicit details into logical categories and hierarchies.

Ne, by contrast, is defined as "internal statics of objects", which is to say, implicit, internal information about the more permanent, unchanging generalizations of objects and people in the world. Ti, when combined with Ne, sorts and organizes the world's implicit generalizations into logical categories and hierarchies.

Te doesn't "organize" anything; it's a dynamic function. Te is similar to Ti only in that both are rational elements focused on external/explicit information. Ti, being "external statics of fields", tries to take information and organize it into unchanging categories and hierarchies. Te, being "external dynamics of objects", sees how the explicit, external information about objects and people in the world is constantly shifting and changing, and tries to influence that in efficient and productive ways. It's similar to Fe, "internal dynamics of objects", which sees how implicit, internal information about objects and people in the world shifts and changes, and tries to influence it in positive, emotionally moving ways.

When combined with Ni, Te seeks to influence implicit, generalized, long-term changes in the world. When combined with Si, Te seeks to influence explicit, specific, short-term changes in the world. In neither case does it "organize" anything in the same way that Ti does; in fact, Te usually sees Ti's insistence on organization and hierarchy as a pointless hindrance to its goal of influencing changes in a shifting, dynamic world.

[leckysupport]

Te, being "external dynamics of objects", sees how the explicit, external information about objects and people in the world is constantly shifting and changing

Constant change and shifting of anything in the real world basically implies concepts such as 'uncertainty' and 'risk'. Concepts which are generally associated with Ni and Ne.

[Beautiful sky]

Ti + Se organizes external information, Ti + Ne organizes internal information. Se is defined as "external statics of objects", which is to say, explicit, external information about the more permanent, unchanging details of objects and people in the world. Ti, when combined with Se, sorts and organizes the world's explicit details into logical categories and hierarchies.

Ne, by contrast, is defined as "internal statics of objects", which is to say, implicit, internal information about the more permanent, unchanging generalizations of objects and people in the world. Ti, when combined with Ne, sorts and organizes the world's implicit generalizations into logical categories and hierarchies.

Te doesn't "organize" anything; it's a dynamic function. Te is similar to Ti only in that both are rational elements focused on external/explicit information. Ti, being "external statics of fields", tries to take information and organize it into unchanging categories and hierarchies. Te, being "external dynamics of objects", sees how the explicit, external information about objects and people in the world is constantly shifting and changing, and tries to influence that in efficient and productive ways. It's similar to Fe, "internal dynamics of objects", which sees how implicit, internal information about objects and people in the world shifts and changes, and tries to influence it in positive, emotionally moving ways.

When combined with Ni, Te seeks to influence implicit, generalized, long-term changes in the world. When combined with Si, Te seeks to influence explicit, specific, short-term changes in the world. In neither case does it "organize" anything in the same way that Ti does; in fact, Te usually sees Ti's insistence on organization and hierarchy as a pointless hindrance to its goal of influencing changes in a shifting, dynamic world.

How can Te not organize, what is methodical thinking then? What is algorithmic thinking?


: a procedure for solving a mathematical problem (as of finding the greatest common divisor) in a finite number of steps that frequently involves repetition of an operation; broadly : a step-by-step procedure for solving a problem or accomplishing some end

Te essentially finds the steps involved to solve a problem or devise a plan of efficiency...combining my thoughts that are out of control sometimes into an order that can be comprehended and organized.

Every description of EII is of one who doesn't keep good track of time because they get involved in a hobby and in trivialities and one who is not well organized; so your argument about Te not being organized and reflect objective reality is just BS and the argument is flawed.

The last sentence is BS...absolute idiocracy...

[Aiss]

How can Te not organize, what is methodical thinking then?

It's methodical as in thinking in methods - dynamic instead of static classification, system, organization, not in conventional meaning of the word, just like "intuitive" in common usage doesn't mean the same as in Jungian sense. It's dynamics of objects, assessing their function, rather than fields. Organization is related to fields (introverted) almost by definition, because it doesn't deal with an object, but with relationships between objects (as in, putting objects in some order), and static, because it requires some measure of stability in relations, focus on constant ones, not on their changeability.

[Beautiful sky]

INTROVERTED INTELLECTUAL CONCEPTION
Introverted Intellectual Conception prefers to
collect information from inside and to compare it to the
sets of subjective rules and understandings. The major
method of such comparison is Intellectual evaluation of
subjective facts. These rules and understandings don’t need
to be substantiated by any objective data. In fact, if
objective data contradict with the ideas of Introverted
Intellectual Conception , they are either ignored or
twisted to fit the idea. If following the reality is the main
objective of Extraverted Intellectual Conception ,
Introverted Intellectual Conception follows the inner
geometry of the ideas it develops. This type of thinking
may become very complex, abstract and symbolic and
alienate from the reality. In extremes, Introverted
Intellectual Conception becomes absolutely
incomprehensible, closed in, lacking any touch with the
reality.

EXTRAVERTED INTELLECTUAL CONCEPTION
Extraverted Intellectual Conception compares
new information to the sets of objective rules and
understandings. The major method of such comparison is
intellectual evaluation of objective facts. It constantly
collects objective evidences and derives rules and laws
from the evidences collected. Every conclusion is inferred
from a set of objective facts collected from the reality and
is used for a practical purpose directed outward, back to
the reality. Extraverted Intellectual type has an
intellectual formula for everything. It approaches any
phenomena from the standpoint of a universal set of rules
derived from experience. Such type sees momentarily
every aspect of a problem and is able to factor them in
properly to come to a solution. The problem is – not
everything can be categorized. People can’t operate like
machines. Not everybody is a perfect thinking machine
like Extraverted Intellectual type. Not everybody uses
objective reasoning as a universal gauge. Sometimes
people want to do silly things just for the sake of it.

[leckysupport]

It's methodical as in thinking in methods

IMO these methods are always backed up by some sort of reason based on empirical information. And this reason must make some sort rational logical sense. So in a way Te would organize.

[Krig the Viking]

Constant change and shifting of anything in the real world basically implies concepts such as 'uncertainty' and 'risk'. Concepts which are generally associated with Ni and Ne.

The implication you inferred was not something I had intended to imply. Si sensations, for example, are also constantly shifting and changing. Consider someone laying on the beach: the sun goes behind the clouds, and the person feels cooler. The sun comes out again, and the person feels warmer. The breeze comes in from the sea, and the person smells saltwater, etc. Si sensations are constantly shifting and changing, and they're not always associated with uncertainty or risk.

Uncertainty and risk are more closely linked to "the unknown", which might explain why you associate those terms with Ne and Ni. The results of change can sometimes be unknown, but often they can be known with reasonable certainty (the sun will set tonight and rise tomorrow -- certainly that's an example of a shift or change in the world that entails no significant uncertainty or risk). In such cases, the association of risk and uncertainty with "constant change and shifting" is unwarranted.

[Beautiful sky]

It's methodical as in thinking in methods - dynamic instead of static classification, system, organization, not in conventional meaning of the word, just like "intuitive" in common usage doesn't mean the same as in Jungian sense. It's dynamics of objects, assessing their function, rather than fields. Organization is related to fields (introverted) almost by definition, because it doesn't deal with an object, but with relationships between objects (as in, putting objects in some order), and static, because it requires some measure of stability in relations, focus on constant ones, not on their changeability.

Of course Te organizes stuff in the immediate outside world based on derived formulas, otherwise, I would be up shit creek...sorry.

I maintain the order...they put things in order...or make up methods and I follow..leaders/supporters.

[Krig the Viking]

EXTRAVERTED INTELLECTUAL CONCEPTION
Extraverted Intellectual Conception compares
new information to the sets of objective rules and
understandings. The major method of such comparison is
intellectual evaluation of objective facts. It constantly
collects objective evidences and derives rules and laws
from the evidences collected. Every conclusion is inferred
from a set of objective facts collected from the reality and
is used for a practical purpose directed outward, back to
the reality. Extraverted Intellectual type has an
intellectual formula for everything. It approaches any
phenomena from the standpoint of a universal set of rules
derived from experience. Such type sees momentarily
every aspect of a problem and is able to factor them in
properly to come to a solution. The problem is – not
everything can be categorized. People can’t operate like
machines. Not everybody is a perfect thinking machine
like Extraverted Intellectual type. Not everybody uses
objective reasoning as a universal gauge. Sometimes
people want to do silly things just for the sake of it.

Rod's description of Te is misleading; it inadequately conveys the dynamic qualities of the element, and thus fails to distinguish it from Ti. Here is Augusta's description of the same element:

Black (extraverted) logic
Perceives information about animate and inanimate objects' physical activity, deeds, and actions/activities. This perception provides the ability to make sense of what is going on. It defines the awareness of and ability or inability to think up ways of doing things, distinguish rational actions from irrational ones, and the ability or inability to direct others' work.

When this element is in the leading position, the individual has the ability to plan his and others' work, understand the logicalness and illogicalness of processes, and correct the work activities of other people in accordance with this understanding. And the ability to apply personally and convey to others the most rational ways of doing things.

Notes on "The Socion, or Socionics Basics" -- pg. 2

As Aiss said, Te focuses on methods and ways of doing things. It focuses on "what works" and "what doesn't work". It doesn't care about putting things into static categories like Ti does.

[Beautiful sky]

Rod's description of Te is misleading; it inadequately conveys the dynamic qualities of the element. Here is Augusta's description of the same element:



Notes on "The Socion, or Socionics Basics" -- pg. 2

As Aiss said, Te focuses on methods and ways of doing things. It focuses on "what works" and "what doesn't work". It doesn't care about putting things into static categories like Ti does.

Your BS is misleading, Rod's alighns perfectly with Filatova and Socioniko.

Thinking up ways of doing things is organizing...Te does not only come up with ways of working but also it works very well, very much unlike Ti sometimes.

Where in the description of Filatova's here do you see Ti organizing?...

He is able to rationally and adequately choose the best of the available systems or dogmas and to fight for its implementation uncompromisingly up to the point of impertinence. He categorically rejects everything that cannot fit into this system, and perfects it to its ideal state. He is very consistent in the realization of his system, even when it comprises inconstancy. In this way Talleyrand succeeded in occupying the highest positions under Bourbons, the Convent, the Directory, Napoleon, and once again under Bourbons, and finally died prosperous and rich, which he has always strived for.

[Aiss]

Of course Te organizes stuff in the immediate outside world based on derived formulas, otherwise, I would be up shit creek...sorry.

My point is that it doesn't.

[leckysupport]

The implication you inferred was not something I had intended to imply. Si sensations, for example, are also constantly shifting and changing. Consider someone laying on the beach: the sun goes behind the clouds, and the person feels cooler. The sun comes out again, and the person feels warmer. The breeze comes in from the sea, and the person smells saltwater, etc. Si sensations are constantly shifting and changing, and they're not always associated with uncertainty or risk.

But you talked of explicit external information about objects not internal sensations, hence why I spoke of "constant change and shifting of anything in the real world".

Uncertainty and risk are more closely linked to "the unknown", which might explain why you associate those terms with Ne and Ni. The results of change can sometimes be unknown, but often they can be known with reasonable certainty (the sun will set tonight and rise tomorrow -- certainly that's an example of a shift or change in the world that entails no significant uncertainty or risk). In such cases, the association of risk and uncertainty with "constant change and shifting" is unwarranted.

Constant changing of real world objects typically leads to the unknown just due to the complexity of what goes on around us (in the real world), practically there is very little you can be certain about. In business the field of Risk Management is all about managing change and dealing with unexpected occurrences. You really can't face change in a practical situation without 'risk' and 'uncertainty' popping right up.

[Beautiful sky]

My point is that it doesn't.

Are you out of you mind...how can it not...who will?

If dual pairs ESTj/INFj neither organize then I guess they live in filth and mess right?

If they don't organize then I guess every fucking description of this dual pair shoots to hell because of what you said.
You can't even see your own contridictions in your logic.

My point to you is that your information is absolutely misleading and inaccurate.

[Krig the Viking]

Your BS is misleading, Rod's alighns perfectly with Filatova and Socioniko.

Thinking up ways of doing things is organizing...Te does not only come up with ways of working but also it works very well, very much unlike Ti sometimes.

Where in the description of Filatova's here do you see Ti organizing?...

He is able to rationally and adequately choose the best of the available systems or dogmas and to fight for its implementation uncompromisingly up to the point of impertinence. He categorically rejects everything that cannot fit into this system, and perfects it to its ideal state. He is very consistent in the realization of his system, even when it comprises inconstancy. In this way Talleyrand succeeded in occupying the highest positions under Bourbons, the Convent, the Directory, Napoleon, and once again under Bourbons, and finally died prosperous and rich, which he has always strived for.

LSI chooses a "system" or "dogma", and "categorically" rejects anything that does not fit into it. Ti divides the world into a set of static categories, as Filatova there describes. Te, by contrast, sees how objects in the world always change, and believes that static categories are therefore pointless, since things are always changing anyway.

[Aiss]

Where in the description of Filatova's here do you see Ti organizing?...

He is able to rationally and adequately choose the best of the available systems or dogmas and to fight for its implementation uncompromisingly up to the point of impertinence. He categorically rejects everything that cannot fit into this system, and perfects it to its ideal state. He is very consistent in the realization of his system, even when it comprises inconstancy. In this way Talleyrand succeeded in occupying the highest positions under Bourbons, the Convent, the Directory, Napoleon, and once again under Bourbons, and finally died prosperous and rich, which he has always strived for.

Unless in your opinion organization doesn't have anything to do with putting things in a system. In which case you should perhaps share your understanding of the word with us, for the sake of this discussion.

[Krig the Viking]

But you talked of explicit external information about objects not internal sensations, hence why I spoke of "constant change and shifting of anything in the real world".



Constant changing of real world objects typically leads to the unknown just due to the complexity of what goes on around us (in the real world), practically there is very little you can be certain about. In business the field of Risk Management is all about managing change and dealing with unexpected occurrences. You really can't face change in a practical situation without 'risk' and 'uncertainty' popping right up.

You're thinking of Te blocked with Ni, that is, Te that deals with long-term change. Obviously long-term change is more unknown, and thus has greater risk and uncertainty associated with it.

Te blocked with Si, that is, Te that deals with short-term change, need not necessarily be associated with high levels of risk or uncertainty. The LSE who fixes a car knows how changing the parts of the engine will affect how the engine runs, which does not necessarily involve risk. Or the SLI who installs an air conditioner in just the right spot, to keep the house cool. There are plenty of examples of change in practical situations that don't involve significant risk or uncertainty, but they're mostly smaller, short-term changes.

[Beautiful sky]

Unless in your opinion organization doesn't have anything to do with putting things in a system. In which case you should perhaps share your understanding of the word with us, for the sake of this discussion.

TRY READING

" He knows that business only then goes perfectly if the necessary tempo is set from the very beginning. He does not tolerate procrastination, is an ardent struggler for quality and thoroughness in all work. A good army officer. Like Thomas Edison, a representative of this type is capable of working 19.5 hours a day. He tends to take other people out of the condition of complacency. "

YOU CAN'T SET A TEMPO IF YOU DON'T ORGANIZE YOUR THOUGHTS INTO METHODS.
PEOPLE IN CONDITIONS OF COMPLACENCY WASTE TIME DOING NOTHING OR SUBMERSE IN HOBBIES OR TRIVIAL CRAP LIKE ME.

HERE'S ANOTHER

"The second bright trait of The Administrator is his ability to take care of his family's welfare. He strives for a high standard of living. He demands quality and possesses well-developed esthetic taste. He is a kind of gourmet, likes tasty and healthy meals; parties for his close friends or family members organized by him are distinguished by very high taste".

[Aiss]

Are you out of you mind...how can it not...who will?

If dual pairs ESTj/INFj neither organize then I guess they live in filth and mess right?

If they don't organize then I guess every fucking description of this dual pair shoots to hell because of what you said.
You can't even see your own contridictions in your logic.

My point to you is that your information is absolutely misleading and inaccurate.

Cleaning. Yes. I see your meaning now. You should have said so in the beginning, you know.