What the Te devil?

[tcaudilllg]

What is it about Te that gives you IEIs and SEIs fits?

[Jarno]

An SEI once got mad, because I said something like, if someone doesn't make education they have proven to be bad at what they tried to learn. She found it to be to harsh.

So I guess the bluntness and directness of Te.

[tcaudilllg]

So basically, it makes them mad?

[Jarno]

So basically, it makes them mad?

well she clearly showed that she didn't like it how I put it. She became sort of between irritated and angry.

[Creepy-male]

Feeling insecure about lack of work ethic/seemingly inability to mobilise self unless in a serious crisis/at the eleventh hour before a deadline. Other people reminding us of this HURTS. We know, and if we could fix it, we bloody well would have by now

Chronic uncertainty about efficacy. Always doubting ability to perform tasks and get the intended results (true to PoLR this is an on/off thing: I can either be neurotic and paralysed and mentally prepare the task for way too long so I don't screw up, or I can just charge into a task and start assembling the pieces around me as I go, hoping for the best).

Mmm... uncertainty about appropriate level of detail. Can swing to extremes of parsimony or... whatever the opposite of parsimony is (That could be Ti HA though).

EDIT

Also, maybe more Ti HA again, but having an inclination for listening to internal logic > external reality. I'm slowly maturing out of this but I still make errors time to time.

[Azeroffs]

Feeling insecure about lack of work ethic/seemingly inability to mobilise self unless in a serious crisis/at the eleventh hour before a deadline. Other people reminding us of this HURTS. We know, and if we could fix it, we bloody well would have by now

Chronic uncertainty about efficacy. Always doubting ability to perform tasks and get the intended results (true to PoLR this is an on/off thing: I can either be neurotic and paralysed and mentally prepare the task for way too long so I don't screw up, or I can just charge into a task and start assembling the pieces around me as I go, hoping for the best).

Mmm... uncertainty about appropriate level of detail. Can swing to extremes of parsimony or... whatever the opposite of parsimony is (That could be Ti HA though).

EDIT

Also, maybe more Ti HA again, but having an inclination for listening to internal logic > external reality. I'm slowly maturing out of this but I still make errors time to time.

This has been the most insightful post here, but still there are parts I'm not sure are really related to Te.

[Azeroffs]

Do xEI have issues with being proven wrong with evidence? (blow to Ti-HA?)

[Ave]

Im not XEI, but I always found that my ideas on things which were highly subjective, and highly subjective ideas in general(like Goethe's theory of colors) are usually wrong when faced and tried with objective evidence. I dont have a problem taking this kind of criticism though sometimes I think it would be nice if we could think subjectively, then those subjective ideas get proven right by objective evidence, which like I said almost never happens either because they cant be(like Freud's theories or the existence of God) or because they have been proven wrong by science(Goethe's theory of colors).

Of course I am not Te polr but Te role, so sorry to be intrusive with my comment but I wanted to give my opinion on it.

[Skeptic]

I think PoLRs upset types in two ways
1. they "threaten" people's HA
2. they clash with the creative function (the creative is the function we use both with the most awareness and the most respect imo)

From Wikisocion on Merry-Serious dichotomy (Fe- vs Te-valuing):



I'd guess 3 and 4 explain the Fe-Te conflict the best.

That is really biased in favor of merry types.

[silverchris9]

Te seems unnecessarily regimented and practical to me. It seems as though it irons out all the randomness and uncertainty from things, and tries to make everything work in a certain way. And then the focus on "facts" seems to me to be a lack of imagination. And they don't tend to like my "everything is subjetive" mentality (this is worse with Delta STs who also devalue Ni). Above all, I just feel like Te egos have a bunch of unnecessary proceedures for doing everything the "best" way. I'm not interested in the "best" way, I'm interested in getting it done in the way in which I have to think about it the least. So yeah, that's what I think bothers me about Te.

[glam]

An SEI once got mad, because I said something like, if someone doesn't make education they have proven to be bad at what they tried to learn. She found it to be to harsh.

So I guess the bluntness and directness of Te.

yeah, how something is said can be just as important as what is being said. but it's not just the harshness, she may also have felt like "how do i know that's true?" i can be suspicious or wary of new information; it can be hard for me to sort through it and decide what's useful or relevant or correct. i'm not interested in information for the sake of having more information.

[Alomoes]

An SEI once got mad, because I said something like, if someone doesn't make education they have proven to be bad at what they tried to learn. She found it to be to harsh.

So I guess the bluntness and directness of Te.

You said it way weird. If someone doesn't make education. If someone doesn't make education doesn't make sense. If someone doesn't make the process of receiving or giving systematic instruction, then they didn't do it right. I do things right without attending lecture from someone else.

It's more apt to say, "If you don't know you will not succeed."

Or "If you do not know you will fail."

That will work much better and is much less confusing to read or hear. To be fair, you might be speaking dutch, in which case, carry on, I don't know if that applies in Dutch.

Yes, this is what I care about, making something that is confusing less confusing. Me and my mother have it out when one person finds something confusing. I'll say the plant, she'll ask which plant, and I'll say that plant and point, which is not helpful, because she never looks. Then she'll eventually get it. She'll then say it's not a plant, it's a tree something stupid. I'm like alright, it doesn't matter, as long as you understand what we're talking about. And she's like, I don't understand. I'm like, you clearly do. This cycle occurs every so often. Probably ISFp and INTp relations.

Another cycle is where I do something wrong, and she gets angry. She does something out of order and I get angry. I can clearly see why she should not do the thing out of order, but yeah, she doesn't. I actually walked out once, because she was trying to get a board into a space, and it was clearly not going to fit. But she didn't know that, and wouldn't listen to explanation. She called me rude for trying to explain, so I left.

[crazedrat]

I get the impression Te types are just stating the obvious and oversimplifying to keep things organized. And they kind of cram the obvious down your throat like you're retarded, then they act like they're superior cuz they stated the obvious.
Also there's the appeal to authority through official sources which is usually dismissiveness disguised as insightfulness. It's just like they hold back investigations with excessive constraints. Also they don't look for underlying meaning so much when you speak.. they're more surface oriented so if your semantics aren't incredibly developed they can just reduce the whole conversation to pure relativism. I've had them pull this a number of times and it's infuriating. Te also translates into rigid hangups.
It depends alot on the type too though. Like ILIs have the relativism and stating the obvious, but not so much some of the others.

An SEI once got mad, because I said something like, if someone doesn't make education they have proven to be bad at what they tried to learn. She found it to be to harsh.

So I guess the bluntness and directness of Te.

See this is stupid, but it's a good example of Te and how it could feasibly piss me off.
Jarno says the comment is "harsh". The comment is not harsh it's hastey. It's a hastey conclusion. To describe this as harsh is dismissive. It makes it sound like it's correct, but just needs to be restated "nicer". But the statement is actually incorrect.
Reading it, it seems like it organizes reality nicely in Jarnos mind. But only by cutting off a ton of exceptions. It is obvious there could be a variety of reasons a person fails their education. Education doesn't even reflect the real experience of working a profession..
But we're not considering any of this further than the statement "They have been proven to fail at what they wanted to learn".
It gives this added air of snobbishness and condescension which makes me want to retaliate against it.

[Azeroffs]

I get the impression Te types are just stating the obvious and oversimplifying to keep things organized. And they kind of cram the obvious down your throat like you're retarded, then they act like they're superior cuz they stated the obvious.
Also there's the appeal to authority through official sources which is usually dismissiveness disguised as insightfulness. It's just like they hold back investigations with excessive constraints. Also they don't look for underlying meaning so much when you speak.. they're more surface oriented so if your semantics aren't incredibly developed they can just reduce the whole conversation to pure relativism. I've had them pull this a number of times and it's infuriating. Te also translates into rigid hangups.
It depends alot on the type too though. Like ILIs have the relativism and stating the obvious, but not so much some of the others.



See this is stupid, but it's a good example of Te and how it could feasibly piss me off.
Jarno says the comment is "harsh". The comment is not harsh it's hastey. It's a hastey conclusion. To describe this as harsh is dismissive. It makes it sound like it's correct, but just needs to be restated "nicer". But the statement is actually incorrect.
Reading it, it seems like it organizes reality nicely in Jarnos mind. But only by cutting off a ton of exceptions. It is obvious there could be a variety of reasons a person fails their education. Education doesn't even reflect the real experience of working a profession..
But we're not considering any of this further than the statement "They have been proven to fail at what they wanted to learn".
It gives this added air of snobbishness and condescension which makes me want to retaliate against it.

I think you need to realize that Te-PoLR is a weakness. Maybe what has been stated is incorrect, but for you to say that Te types just have it wrong is just trying to make yourself out to have no weakness. You're just taking regular stupidity and saying its Te to make yourself superior.

Other people do it a lot too, but I think think people need to realize what a PoLR is. The whole idea of a PoLR is that it is compatible with your main way of looking at things which is why it so hard to cope with.

[krieger]

See this is stupid, but it's a good example of Te and how it could feasibly piss me off.
Jarno says the comment is "harsh". The comment is not harsh it's hastey. It's a hastey conclusion. To describe this as harsh is dismissive. It makes it sound like it's correct, but just needs to be restated "nicer". But the statement is actually incorrect.
Reading it, it seems like it organizes reality nicely in Jarnos mind. But only by cutting off a ton of exceptions. It is obvious there could be a variety of reasons a person fails their education. Education doesn't even reflect the real experience of working a profession..
But we're not considering any of this further than the statement "They have been proven to fail at what they wanted to learn".
It gives this added air of snobbishness and condescension which makes me want to retaliate against it.

I agree. The statement is patently wrong. What is hard to accept is only the fact that it is also succesful. That there are people in the world that can profit from an act that is principally stupid.

[jughead]

"I get the impression Te types are just stating the obvious and oversimplifying to keep things organized. And they kind of cram the obvious down your throat like you're retarded, then they act like they're superior cuz they stated the obvious.
Also there's the appeal to authority through official sources which is usually dismissiveness disguised as insightfulness. It's just like they hold back investigations with excessive constraints. Also they don't look for underlying meaning so much when you speak.. they're more surface oriented so if your semantics aren't incredibly developed they can just reduce the whole conversation to pure relativism. I've had them pull this a number of times and it's infuriating. Te also translates into rigid hangups.
It depends alot on the type too though. Like ILIs have the relativism and stating the obvious, but not so much some of the others.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarno View Post
An SEI once got mad, because I said something like, if someone doesn't make education they have proven to be bad at what they tried to learn. She found it to be to harsh.

So I guess the bluntness and directness of Te.
See this is stupid, but it's a good example of Te and how it could feasibly piss me off.
Jarno says the comment is "harsh". The comment is not harsh it's hastey. It's a hastey conclusion. To describe this as harsh is dismissive. It makes it sound like it's correct, but just needs to be restated "nicer". But the statement is actually incorrect.
Reading it, it seems like it organizes reality nicely in Jarnos mind. But only by cutting off a ton of exceptions. It is obvious there could be a variety of reasons a person fails their education. Education doesn't even reflect the real experience of working a profession..
But we're not considering any of this further than the statement "They have been proven to fail at what they wanted to learn".
It gives this added air of snobbishness and condescension which makes me want to retaliate against it. "

Pretty good.
Te types I see as overly concerned with competence and the lack thereof in others. Say if you didn't do the dishes exactly to optimum procedure they will harass you. (Te as logical aggressor, hitting a polr, a psychological painful spot)

As for ILIs and LSE's they will point out things that are logically possible to say but nobody should say them because they are retarded in conversation and just mean spirited. Extinuating circumstances (aka life) doesn't exist in their statements.
Stupid metaphor...a yellojacket buzzes you and is annoying looking for openings...it pisses many people off and they kill the fucker. A bee doesn't warn you it just comes straight for you, aggressive style. But I'm not a fucking bee, and you don't mess with me. We speak different languages. EII would be grateful at LSE's logical aggresion because it gets them moving and working. To me its just plain arrogrant asshole behavior and stupid.

"I agree. The statement is patently wrong. What is hard to accept is only the fact that it is also successful. That there are people in the world that can profit from an act that is principally stupid. "
Yes and it happens ALL THE TIME and its painful to expirience.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

Even though we're correct though, America is unfortunately a very Te-valuing society. So unless we have a huge revolution (not likely), they are always going to value fake bullshit like that. So they always will value rigid, formal education and straight male external institutions like that over the ****** purity of true romantic art. I'm not playing the victim I'm just being real, we're not going to change a whole civilization and a natural inborn function of an entire society.

I really just need to move, I never been one with that culture. Way too Te-valuing, just gets on my nerves too much naturally and not much to change it other than simply removing myself from the bullshit.

[Marie84]

Pretty good.
Te types I see as overly concerned with competence and the lack thereof in others. Say if you didn't do the dishes exactly to optimum procedure they will harass you. (Te as logical aggressor, hitting a polr, a psychological painful spot)

So are Ti's, it's just that the focus is less about pragmatic issues and more on mental competence. Ti's exemplify "correctness" and theoretical thinking as a whole, and when it's paired with Se it manifests a sense of authority in which it feels a right to implement those subjective "findings" onto others. This is not to say either Te or Ti is less harsh or superior, rather both are a form of mental discomfort to those who possess it as a PoLR.
In the case of Ti PoLR's, Ti works as a form of mental, or "problem solving" incompetence made to make them feel stupid, just as Te PoLR works to make IEI/SEI feel inferior in accomplishing practical matters

Stupid metaphor...a yellojacket buzzes you and is annoying looking for openings...it pisses many people off and they kill the fucker. A bee doesn't warn you it just comes straight for you, aggressive style. But I'm not a fucking bee, and you don't mess with me. We speak different languages. EII would be grateful at LSE's logical aggresion because it gets them moving and working. To me its just plain arrogrant asshole behavior and stupid.

Se PoLR's would not be grateful to any sort of aggressive tactics being used as a form of motivation

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

I think you need to realize that Te-PoLR is a weakness. Maybe what has been stated is incorrect, but for you to say that Te types just have it wrong is just trying to make yourself out to have no weakness. You're just taking regular stupidity and saying its Te to make yourself superior.

I just think you're saying that cuz Ian owned ya. =)

But I would accept that that sentiment is not necessarily tied to Te-polr-in-general, except as a general IP-EJ conflict: EJs expend energy wantonly, because they are constantly seeing things that can be moved, changed, nudged, altered for the better (dynamics of objects). IPs conserve energy, because they are constantly sensing this sort of internal motion, or the motion between things that occurs without our intervention (dynamics of fields). So in that sense, I would prefer to focus on these waves of invisible change than constantly expend energy (mental energy) chasing external improvements/motion.

Yeah! I like this, I think it's accurate.

Do xEI have issues with being proven wrong with evidence? (blow to Ti-HA?)

It's more exactly like Ian said, they think they are 'right' when the 'right answer' always depends on the circumstance. Yes math is 'always right' but on the same token, how often does one truly use math in their daily lives? They are correct to the point of being interpersonally/autistically weird. The only issue I have with being proven wrong with evidence, is I'm too aware of how important people's perceptions are about everything. But really it's a matter of they expend energy very fast, and they arrive at very hasty conclusions. INFps are naturally slower. (I'll talk about this in another thread)

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

Honestly, if you just wrote more mature, analytical posts like this instead of causing drama and creating havoc, you'd be liked by 95% of the forum.

Oh don't be so sensitive. IEI males will always know how to successfully troll people. It's not like Te-egos aren't doing the same thing to us by thinking they're always 'one upping us' cause that's our polr. *roll eyes*

[Azeroffs]

I just think you're saying that cuz Ian owned ya. =)

No I just don't think this has anything to do with Te-PoLR. Some of the things he stated are things that Te types do, but it's simply a Te bashing without getting to what xEI is missing. He's not even making an attempt to see how he is missing something.

See this is stupid, but it's a good example of Te and how it could feasibly piss me off.
Jarno says the comment is "harsh". The comment is not harsh it's hastey. It's a hastey conclusion. To describe this as harsh is dismissive. It makes it sound like it's correct, but just needs to be restated "nicer". But the statement is actually incorrect.
Reading it, it seems like it organizes reality nicely in Jarnos mind. But only by cutting off a ton of exceptions. It is obvious there could be a variety of reasons a person fails their education. Education doesn't even reflect the real experience of working a profession..
But we're not considering any of this further than the statement "They have been proven to fail at what they wanted to learn".
It gives this added air of snobbishness and condescension which makes me want to retaliate against it.

This part I agree with actually. It has nothing to do with Te, and as he said, it's a blatantly wrong conclusion. When I read it, I had the same feeling.

It's more exactly like Ian said, they think they are 'right' when the 'right answer' always depends on the circumstance. Yes math is 'always right' but on the same token, how often does one truly use math in their daily lives? They are correct to the point of being interpersonally/autistically weird. The only issue I have with being proven wrong with evidence, is I'm too aware of how important people's perceptions are about everything. But really it's a matter of they expend energy very fast, and they arrive at very hasty conclusions. INFps are naturally slower. (I'll talk about this in another thread)

If you can tell me how you're lacking something, I'll be able to trust what you're saying, but you're just making out to be 'they're wrong and I'm right' which clearly indicates that you're missing something, and that more likely than not you're rationalizing you superiority.

[crazedrat]

I think you need to realize that Te-PoLR is a weakness. Maybe what has been stated is incorrect, but for you to say that Te types just have it wrong is just trying to make yourself out to have no weakness. You're just taking regular stupidity and saying its Te to make yourself superior.

Te types don't always have it wrong. And I never said they did. The question was: What pisses INFps off about Te? Some Te pisses me off and other Te I ignore.

The real weakness of INFp is Se. Te polr is somewhere in between the ego and there. The DS function is weaker than the polr.
Model As forward moving information metabolism is inherently flawed and it misleads people to think there is an irrevocable imbalance between the id and superego where the id always comes out stronger. But that makes no sense. They have to be balanced around the superid.

There are Ti heavy INFps who have stronger Te than they do Fi on this board.

[Azeroffs]

Te types don't always have it wrong. And I never said they did. The question was: What pisses INFps off about Te? Some Te pisses me off and other Te I ignore.

You're right. That's my bad. I was expecting something to the effect of 'how does Te affect you?' and so 'how is it your weakness?' played into it. I got it wrong.

The real weakness of INFp is Se and then Ti. Te polr is somewhere in between the ego and there. The DS function is weaker than the polr. Why would we say the superego is inherently weaker than the id? That makes no sense. They have to be balanced around the superid.
Model As forward moving information metabolism is inherently flawed starting with there only being 8 distinct function blocks where there should be 16.

Idk where you're going with that, but that's a topic for a different thread I think.

[crazedrat]

You can ignore it if you want.

You do realize that you just used Te to criticize a Fe-ego for using Fe when criticizing Te-egos?

Lol

[Azeroffs]

The real weakness of INFp is Se. Te polr is somewhere in between the ego and there. The DS function is weaker than the polr.
Model As forward moving information metabolism is inherently flawed and it misleads people to think there is an irrevocable imbalance between the id and superego where the id always comes out stronger. But that makes no sense. They have to be balanced around the superid.

here I'll ask you more specifc questions.

DS weaker than PoLR. I don't want to get into details like the PoLR is stronger than the DS, but weaker than everything else. If thats the case, fine I can accept that, but if not I have to ask why do you think so?

I'm not sure what you mean by forward moving info-metablism.

I think it makes sense that the id comes out stronger than the super-ego for the simple reason that they are somewhat related to the ego. But also, if there is an opposing relationship of strength between dual elements (e.g. base-Se implies DS-Ni) then the id must be stronger than the super-ego since the super-ego is suppressed by the ego.

and you had mentioned there should be 16 instead of 8 blocks, so why do you think so?

[crazedrat]

Fine

here I'll ask you more specifc questions.

DS weaker than PoLR.

For the sake of this argument.. yes, the DS is opposite the primary function, and this implies it must be the weakest function.

I don't want to get into details like the PoLR is stronger than the DS, but weaker than everything else.

Only sometimes is this true. There are cases where the polr is stronger than the demonstrative function.

The polr is part of the superego. The superego is opposite the id. By saying polr is the weakest function it implies the superego is inherently weaker than the id. Where did this bias against the superego come from? It comes from model A.

In model A information moves readily in function blocks like Ij/Ep or Ip/Ej.

It's also considered easier to move from Ni to Ne than from Ni to Si, etc.

Where do these rules come from? They are completely arbitrary. Any justification you give for them I can give a counter justification for the opposite rule being true.

There are cases where these rules are inverted.

There are types whose function blocks are all Ij/Ip and Ej/Ep, like a Ni/Ti INFp, and who have the superego dominant over the id.

This is basically what subtype was for a while. Except it was never explained.


I'm not sure what you mean by forward moving info-metablism.

I'm referring to the flow of information which occurs in model A which I described above. The flow itself is fixed by a set of rules.

I think it makes sense that the id comes out stronger than the super-ego for the simple reason that they are somewhat related to the ego.

What? No. That makes no sense at all. In what way exactly are they "somewhat related" moreso than say the dominant and the role function? Why is Ni & Si less alike than Ni & Ne?

But also, if there is an opposing relationship of strength between dual elements (e.g. base-Se implies DS-Ni) then the id must be stronger than the super-ego since the super-ego is suppressed by the ego.
The ego also repressed the id. The ego balanced the id and superego. Nothing about the ego specifically favors the id over the superego.

and you had mentioned there should be 16 instead of 8 blocks?
Right.

.

[blankblank]

Because people with strong Te are efficient and logical, and I'm not. I'm afraid of being embarrassed and reprimanded for not doing what I know I should be doing around strong Tes.

[Kalinoche buenanoche]

play humanist

[DividedsGhost]

Grumble Grumble






















































Now someone bring me some food.

[xerx]

See this is stupid, but it's a good example of Te and how it could feasibly piss me off.
Jarno says the comment is "harsh". The comment is not harsh it's hastey. It's a hastey conclusion. To describe this as harsh is dismissive. It makes it sound like it's correct, but just needs to be restated "nicer". But the statement is actually incorrect.
Reading it, it seems like it organizes reality nicely in Jarnos mind. But only by cutting off a ton of exceptions. It is obvious there could be a variety of reasons a person fails their education. Education doesn't even reflect the real experience of working a profession..
But we're not considering any of this further than the statement "They have been proven to fail at what they wanted to learn".
It gives this added air of snobbishness and condescension which makes me want to retaliate against it.

Honestly, if you just wrote more mature, analytical posts like this instead of causing drama and creating havoc, you'd be liked by 95% of the forum.

[Aiss]

I get the impression Te types are just stating the obvious and oversimplifying to keep things organized. And they kind of cram the obvious down your throat like you're retarded, then they act like they're superior cuz they stated the obvious.

Funny. Just today I had an argument with an ESE about this again. She's often stating the obvious, expects me to applaud it and is upset when I don't. I usually point out it's obvious, and as she just keeps repeating it, that there's no need to repeatedly state the obvious. Then she rants about how "you have to talk of something blah blah blah" and how it doesn't matter how obvious it is or isn't.

Basically Fe seems to me like communicating the obvious for the sake of communicating, i.e. disregarding information being exchanged because what matters to it is exchange itself.

[Words]

Know an IEI who would be in bits working in a place where there was no set rules, things changed on a case by case basis.

She'd try to apply rules to things and get stuff really wrong.

[Nowisthetime]

What is it about Te that gives you IEIs and SEIs fits?

There is nothing about it. It is just the fact that it is my polr, and I automatically react in a negative way to it. If I try to explain it I just start rationalizing and I miss the point.

[Creepy-Korpsey]

What is it about Te that gives you IEIs and SEIs fits?

Simply put, those who enjoy blowing bubbles are leery of those who excel at popping them.

Though the xEIs I know appreciate my ability to build/fix things, explain phenomena, and otherwise provide solutions to problems, they tend to catch a major bummer when my skeptical analysis and facts-only approach kill all the faeries and spirits they hope are at work in the world.

[RaptorsMavs]

Te is way too orderly and systematic to be to my taste, counting and plotting, sizing up and arming their vehicles with vengeance and stampedes on chaos. There is always something changing, something different, along with free exploration of techniques that leaves Me staggered, stunned, and stupefied by the cause and effect chain of determinism.

[Ave]

Te is way too orderly and systematic to be to my taste, counting and plotting, sizing up and arming their vehicles with vengeance and stampedes on chaos. There is always something changing, something different, along with free exploration of techniques that leaves Me staggered, stunned, and stupefied by the cause and effect chain of determinism.

I think Ti is more about causes, and Te more about consequences.

Ultimately Ti wants things to "make sense" in terms of understanding why something happened, or why it has been decided in such a way. Te thinking is more outcome-oriented. I'm having a hard time explaining it clearly enough.