Ti creative vs Te creative
in line with this thread ->http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...light=creative, I was wondering about the differences between creative Ti and Te.
If you take Te to be matter, and Ti, material relations, then Ti creative would be about changing material relationships, bringing some matter closer together and pushing others away. Te creative would be changing matter itself, adjusting its physical qualities but leaving its relationships intact. Is this correct?
Te is methodOriginally Posted by ConcreteButterfly
Ti is logical structure
Neither is about matter.
Thx for the low hanging fruit.
*cough* sorry
ok in real terms, ti creative might be like calling yourself a doctor when you only have a bach biology degree. you link up the two by finding a similarity between what doctors do and what biologists do. so you create a new material relationship.
te creative might be like accepting that someone is a doctor, but changing their work itself, making it more efficient, in line with the "ideal" of doctor. sort of the opposite of Ti, the material relationship is taken for granted, and then the material form is adjusted to be in line with that.
Last edited by ConcreteButterfly; 12-05-2014 at 10:09 PM.
i got matter from socionics wiki, it described te = matter, fe = energy, ne = time, and se = space. it's a simplification for sure but still useful imo
i meant bach biology degree. in any case not an MD
Thx for all the fish.
im bad at explaining things lol
and its just my opinion, of course
anyway i see te creatives taking one thing and using it in another way, like they'd use a spade to hammer in a nail. is it still a spade to them ? i think te creatives accept a particular definiton of something and then change its actions to be in line with that, but the definition could be really different to what most people think of it as
sure
Te creative - "As a matter of fact, yes blah blah" "Im not sure thats entirely correct, blah blah"
TI creative - "Ha, this motherfucker right here is a genius!" "No, he's an idiot. 'Blah blah is blah blah blah'. Are you serious?"
Projection is ordinary. Person A projects at person B, hoping tovalidate something about person A by the response of person B. However, person B, not wanting to be an obejct of someone elses ego and guarding against existential terror constructs a personality which protects his ego and maintain a certain sense of a robust and real self that is different and separate from person A. Sadly, this robust and real self, cut off by defenses of character from the rest of the world, is quite vulnerable and fragile given that it is imaginary and propped up through external feed back. Person B is dimly aware of this and defends against it all the more, even desperately projecting his anxieties back onto person A, with the hope of shoring up his ego with salubrious validation. All of this happens without A or B acknowledging it, of course. Because to face up to it consciously is shocking, in that this is all anybody is doing or can do and it seems absurd when you realize how pathetic it is.
Have it considered that it might be wrong?
have i you mean? yes of course, i dont take it as fact, it's just one of looking at it.
Yes, you, I am sorry. I was not not fully awake at the time
It sounded like Wikisocion is a reliable, "true Socionics" source. I don't think "matter" is a better way of looking at it than the five elements metaphors. It does not make intuitive sense, even, since Te is a Dynamic IE. I would have understood if we were talking about Se...
What is meant by"matter"?
-
Dual type(as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Agree with your conclusion, just Te cannot be method since Te is empirical, while method is not, it is a priori. True, Te block (Te + Pi) make types methodical, not Te alone.
If you need a word, just use "fact"; "experience" is good, too, just too generic and can apply to other Bodies functions as well, one way or another, IMO. Fact is the least ambiguous and the closest it can get to what Te processes, as far as I can tell.
I think that empiricism is just method of choice of Te, because it is the clear methodology of achieving knowledge, as apposed to "theorycrafting" which is not procedural.
Right, just you don't care about what method of knowledge Te types prefer, but what notion could closely present Te itself. That of yours is merely an arbitrary choice. Why then don't you use other stereotypical traits of Te types, say "efficiency"?...
Oh no that makes me Te creative...
You are probably right. I can't be arsed to really think about relationship between Te vision and empiricism. Now you know why was thanking for the low hanging fruit.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
