Results 1 to 28 of 28

Thread: Ignoring function

  1. #1

    Default Ignoring function

    The ignoring function is said to be completely bypassed by the conscious mind, but at the same time it's a very strong function that can adapt to changing circumstances. how does this happen? does the ignoring function develop as a side effect of using the base?

  2. #2
    Mausoleum at Halicarnassus The Foundation's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    73
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I would inquire that the ignoring function is mainly developed for the sole purpose of getting people to stop using it, beating them at their own game.

    Since your Lead function is directly contrary to the Ignoring function, you will draw fire for using a devalued perspective in a group full of people using your Ignoring function; therefore, to fight back and establish the true hierarchy of your Lead function over their contrary value, you need to be creative in dismantling it and making it look silly or inane, playing it as a sort of mocking game to make people see how ridiculous the perspective is.

    So I would think yes, that the ignoring function develops as a side effect of the Lead Function, as embracing the Lead element's worldview downplays the Ignoring element's worldview and deems it as trite and obsolete. Its only purpose is to get people to stop using it and stop believing it and to instead embrace your Lead perspective.
    Have a different opinion on my type? Message me or tell me.

  3. #3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Foundation View Post
    I would inquire that the ignoring function is mainly developed for the sole purpose of getting people to stop using it, beating them at their own game.

    Since your Lead function is directly contrary to the Ignoring function, you will draw fire for using a devalued perspective in a group full of people using your Ignoring function; therefore, to fight back and establish the true hierarchy of your Lead function over their contrary value, you need to be creative in dismantling it and making it look silly or inane, playing it as a sort of mocking game to make people see how ridiculous the perspective is.

    So I would think yes, that the ignoring function develops as a side effect of the Lead Function, as embracing the Lead element's worldview downplays the Ignoring element's worldview and deems it as trite and obsolete. Its only purpose is to get people to stop using it and stop believing it and to instead embrace your Lead perspective.


    Good point it does seem to manifest automatically around other people, as though almost goading them into challenging it and losing, in favor of the lead function
    I think it goes beyond that though, because people use it even when alone, albeit unconsciously. It seems like the default relaxed state function. Maybe people are physically identified with it to the extent they don't experience a difference between their own use of it and another's, so it would develop merely by experiencing others using it

  4. #4
    Mausoleum at Halicarnassus The Foundation's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    73
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ConcreteButterfly View Post
    Good point it does seem to manifest automatically around other people, as though almost goading them into challenging it and losing, in favor of the lead function
    I think it goes beyond that though, because people use it even when alone, albeit unconsciously. It seems like the default relaxed state function. Maybe people are physically identified with it to the extent they don't experience a difference between their own use of it and another's, so it would develop merely by experiencing others using it
    I would think that even though people use the function alone, that its use is almost always serving the agenda of the Lead function, much like how the Creative function is a sort of slave to the Lead function. It's use in privacy could be interpreted to mean that people use it to strengthen their own Lead function or further expand on its views, sort of like orienting yourself in the world. The use of the Ignoring function unconsciously probably serves to look for holes or inconsistencies with the views of the Lead function, almost as if you are trying to prepare for attack from that counter-perspective to possible weakness in your own viewpoints with your Lead function. Thus, the Ignoring function's unconscious use might act as a sort of training mechanism to make the Lead perspective better able to convince others of its superiority over the Ignoring function. I imagine it operating much like how a vaccine releases damaged pathogens into your body for your immune system to fend off and to start producing antibodies to protect it from a real infection.

    I'm not too sure, however, so this is mere speculation.
    Have a different opinion on my type? Message me or tell me.

  5. #5
    ouronis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    TIM
    &*self
    Posts
    867
    Mentioned
    43 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    I wonder if, in some degree, Lead/Ignoring dynamics within an individual(intrapersonally) can lead to relativism or some other sort of diminished individuation(not meaning this in the Jungian sense), especially since as pointed out in this thread, much of the conflict between these(your lead is my ignoring and vice versas), interpersonally, is political. Objectively, both sides are simply trying to overpower the other. If you step outside your viewpoint, you may be captured by this sense that neither is better than the other, and since the ignoring function is presently unconscious, you may feel consumed by a nagging sense of doubt regarding your own efficacy. Also, this might be achieved by another party, outside of you, doing what was mentioned by Foundation, and just completely subjugating you psychologically over and over again.

    It makes me wonder which function is typically concerned with the effects of "the Other," as in the "outsider that is nothing but an enemy."

    Although, I guess this all kind of ignores ConcreteButterfly's points, whose basis I would be interested in hearing.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    TIM
    LSI-Se sx
    Posts
    3,394
    Mentioned
    340 Post(s)
    Tagged
    25 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ouronis View Post
    I wonder if, in some degree, Lead/Ignoring dynamics within an individual(intrapersonally) can lead to relativism or some other sort of diminished individuation(not meaning this in the Jungian sense), especially since as pointed out in this thread, much of the conflict between these(your lead is my ignoring and vice versas), interpersonally, is political. Objectively, both sides are simply trying to overpower the other. If you step outside your viewpoint, you may be captured by this sense that neither is better than the other, and since the ignoring function is presently unconscious, you may feel consumed by a nagging sense of doubt regarding your own efficacy. Also, this might be achieved by another party, outside of you, doing what was mentioned by Foundation, and just completely subjugating you psychologically over and over again.

    It makes me wonder which function is typically concerned with the effects of "the Other," as in the "outsider that is nothing but an enemy."

    Although, I guess this all kind of ignores ConcreteButterfly's points, whose basis I would be interested in hearing.
    I don't relate to such a dynamics or I haven't observed anything like it. For me my Lead function keeps overpowering Ignoring so successfully I only get glimpses of the Ignoring for very short times. Then my conscious attention goes back to the default. I don't try to force this myself, it happens on its own, I don't even notice by default.

    That's Se vs Si for me and I remember talking a lot to someone who's probably LSE-Si. Have had lots of conflicts over the Ego/ID functions with her but I don't relate to the idea of mocking the Ignoring (as speculated by @The Foundation), it's more like a direct attack of devaluing that perspective.

  7. #7
    ouronis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    TIM
    &*self
    Posts
    867
    Mentioned
    43 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Myst View Post
    I don't relate to such a dynamics or I haven't observed anything like it. For me my Lead function keeps overpowering Ignoring so successfully I only get glimpses of the Ignoring for very short times. Then my conscious attention goes back to the default. I don't try to force this myself, it happens on its own, I don't even notice by default.

    That's Se vs Si for me and I remember talking a lot to someone who's probably LSE-Si. Have had lots of conflicts over the Ego/ID functions with her but I don't relate to the idea of mocking the Ignoring, it's more like a direct attack of devaluing that perspective.
    Mocking vs direct attack, not too much difference there, but I have a hard time imagining such attacks from Si anyway. The idea of my post is that you open yourself up to the influence of the ignoring function, either by mechanism of others or by some other reason, there are so many possible ones, just suffice it to say, some reason, and this begins a feedback loop within you where you are eating your own tail in a sense, impeding any progress via the constant annihilation of your views. Doubt. But supervision could be the interpersonal correlate of what I'm thinking about, and for example, your supervisor has your ignoring as their demonstrative.

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    TIM
    LSI-Se sx
    Posts
    3,394
    Mentioned
    340 Post(s)
    Tagged
    25 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ouronis View Post
    Mocking vs direct attack, not too much difference there, but I have a hard time imagining such attacks from Si anyway. The idea of my post is that you open yourself up to the influence of the ignoring function, either by mechanism of others or by some other reason, there are so many possible ones, just suffice it to say, some reason, and this begins a feedback loop within you where you are eating your own tail in a sense, impeding any progress via the constant annihilation of your views. Doubt. But supervision could be the interpersonal correlate of what I'm thinking about, and for example, your supervisor has your ignoring as their demonstrative.
    Mocking is not as direct as the attacks I do to those Si people. (I'm mainly talking about LSEs or delta STs in general here, will have to think about other Si egos)

    I really don't relate to the doubt thingie. If you really want to attribute that to any ID function I can say Te can sometimes be slightly like that but not often. I wouldn't call it doubt but there is a little conflict sometimes with Te, that goes away quickly though. So for me that's Demonstrative or I'm LSI mistyping as SLE.
    Last edited by Myst; 12-08-2014 at 06:02 AM.

  9. #9
    Mausoleum at Halicarnassus The Foundation's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    73
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Myst View Post
    Mocking is not as direct as the attacks I do to those Si people. (I'm mainly talking about LSEs here, will have to think about other Si egos)

    I really don't relate to the doubt thingie. If you really want to attribute that to any ID function I can say Te can sometimes be slightly like that but not often. I wouldn't call it doubt but there is a little conflict sometimes with Te, that goes away quickly though. So for me that's Demonstrative or I'm LSI mistyping as SLE.
    So long as the attacks downplay the value of your Id elements and their Ego elements you are still abiding by the Ignoring Function's (or, rather, the entire Id block's) perspective. Mockery is just one of many ways to make the contrary elements seem less reasonable.
    Have a different opinion on my type? Message me or tell me.

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    TIM
    LSI-Se sx
    Posts
    3,394
    Mentioned
    340 Post(s)
    Tagged
    25 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Foundation View Post
    So long as the attacks downplay the value of your Id elements and their Ego elements you are still abiding by the Ignoring Function's (or, rather, the entire Id block's) perspective. Mockery is just one of many ways to make the contrary elements seem less reasonable.
    OK you mentioned it as if it was the only way. Yep of course the attacks downplay the value of my Ignoring that's their Ego element.

    Btw I do see this going on for myself:

    I would think that even though people use the function alone, that its use is almost always serving the agenda of the Lead function, much like how the Creative function is a sort of slave to the Lead function. It's use in privacy could be interpreted to mean that people use it to strengthen their own Lead function or further expand on its views, sort of like orienting yourself in the world.

  11. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    TIM
    SLE/LSE sx/sp
    Posts
    2,489
    Mentioned
    76 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    I wonder how anyone can be cognizant of the ego functions in them, given it's how you've perceived the world since forever that one doesn't know any difference.

    Drugs/alcohol is an interesting one to me, does it lower inhibitions or engage different functions cause something sure feels different.

    Also the hangovers etc I think may have an effect on functions being used.

  12. #12

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    TIM
    LSI-Se sx
    Posts
    3,394
    Mentioned
    340 Post(s)
    Tagged
    25 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Words View Post
    I wonder how anyone can be cognizant of the ego functions in them, given it's how you've perceived the world since forever that one doesn't know any difference.

    Drugs/alcohol is an interesting one to me, does it lower inhibitions or engage different functions cause something sure feels different.

    Also the hangovers etc I think may have an effect on functions being used.
    It's a tough nut to crack, true.

    Alcohol doesn't really change my way of seeing things socionics wise. I can laugh easier but that's about it for a change that could be function related at least in some very remote way even when I've drunk a lot.

    Otoh there was a psychological event once that did change my perspective temporarily. So yes I do have something substantial to compare my default state with. If you count interviewing people in a deep way then that's another way to compare.

    Beyond all that, I also analysed/observed a lot based on the theory and I sometimes had some quick flash of insight where maybe I noticed some attention shift or whatever or just seeing for a split second how my perspective is not the same for everyone. By that I mainly mean Se, my leading function, it's a bit easier to notice the Ti/Te differences regarding other people

    These rely on introspection a lot but I also try to go by outwardly observable stuff.

  13. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Foundation View Post
    I would think that even though people use the function alone, that its use is almost always serving the agenda of the Lead function, much like how the Creative function is a sort of slave to the Lead function. It's use in privacy could be interpreted to mean that people use it to strengthen their own Lead function or further expand on its views, sort of like orienting yourself in the world. The use of the Ignoring function unconsciously probably serves to look for holes or inconsistencies with the views of the Lead function, almost as if you are trying to prepare for attack from that counter-perspective to possible weakness in your own viewpoints with your Lead function. Thus, the Ignoring function's unconscious use might act as a sort of training mechanism to make the Lead perspective better able to convince others of its superiority over the Ignoring function. I imagine it operating much like how a vaccine releases damaged pathogens into your body for your immune system to fend off and to start producing antibodies to protect it from a real infection.

    I'm not too sure, however, so this is mere speculation.

    Makes sense. Probably the ignoring function is taken for granted as being subordinate to the Lead function, and in situations where ignoring material is likely to overtake the Lead because of its "potency", one immediately counters it before it draws attention further away from the Lead.

    And I've noticed people become insatiable for ignoring information when their base is lacking information, so in that sense it probably does orient a person in the world, unconsciously pulling them to those areas where the Lead function gains the most (positive) information.
    Last edited by ConcreteButterfly; 12-08-2014 at 07:48 AM.

  14. #14
    Pookie's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    TIM
    IEI-Ni 6w5-9-2 So/Sx
    Posts
    2,131
    Mentioned
    89 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I havent gotten around to reading the posts yet, but something of huge about the Ignoring-Lead dynamic is that Information relating to ones Ignoring gets relayed, or transmuted into the terms(or language) of their Leading.

    For instance, someone pointing out an insight about the world(Roughly Ne) will stick in my mind not as an insight about the world. But rather a thing that happens when so and so occurs(Ni). The Ignoring information informs me but i understand it in a different way.
    I would say that ethically you are still supposed to act as if you have unilateral responsibility; but simultaneously you have to be able to see the other as a fully autonomous, free, aware person.

    Medicalizing social problems has the additional benefit of rendering society not responsible for those social ills. If itís a disease, itís nobodyís fault. Yay empiricism.

  15. #15
    Pookie's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    TIM
    IEI-Ni 6w5-9-2 So/Sx
    Posts
    2,131
    Mentioned
    89 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Foundation View Post
    The use of the Ignoring function unconsciously probably serves to look for holes or inconsistencies with the views of the Lead function, almost as if you are trying to prepare for attack from that counter-perspective to possible weakness in your own viewpoints with your Lead function. Thus, the Ignoring function's unconscious use might act as a sort of training mechanism to make the Lead perspective better able to convince others of its superiority over the Ignoring function.
    Trollish derail on my part, but i dont think you can use Thus and then follow it with Might. Thus is certain. Might incorporates doubt. Your Conjunction is in the wrong function.
    I would say that ethically you are still supposed to act as if you have unilateral responsibility; but simultaneously you have to be able to see the other as a fully autonomous, free, aware person.

    Medicalizing social problems has the additional benefit of rendering society not responsible for those social ills. If itís a disease, itís nobodyís fault. Yay empiricism.

  16. #16
    Mausoleum at Halicarnassus The Foundation's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    73
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pookie View Post
    Trollish derail on my part, but i dont think you can use Thus and then follow it with Might. Thus is certain. Might incorporates doubt. Your Conjunction is in the wrong function.
    Eh, English. Sue me.

    Just as long as the point that I'm skeptical about sub-type comes across.
    Have a different opinion on my type? Message me or tell me.

  17. #17
    EffyCold The Ineffable's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Wallachia
    TIM
    ILE
    Posts
    2,195
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think the Ignoring function is the "devil is in the details", or sometimes the "90% perspiration" function. I find that types minimize their contrary attitudes solely when they boast it, not as a state. Basically people are very strong in their Ignoring function and *could* do everything based on it "at any time", just they *don't* do it in order to produce value over it. They think it's too easy and foolish, because it is unvalued - they minimize its importance. For instance, Ti-Base types are interested in the correct reasoning, rather than correct premises; they think there is a lot of work in setting in place the system, while applying it is a mere formality. The vice-verse is valid.

    I think this rule applies to the full ID block, not just the Ignoring function. One may, however, insist on these functions when dealing people of blind and/or painful spots on them (e.i. Dual, Illusionary, Semi-Dual). It's sort of:
    - most of the time: "we don't have time for this"
    - when someone fails at or rejects them: "you have to not oppose / overlook this entirely".
    Shock intuition, diamond logic.
     

    The16types.info Scientific Model

  18. #18
    Haikus Beautiful sky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    EII land
    TIM
    EII INFj
    Posts
    22,740
    Mentioned
    531 Post(s)
    Tagged
    6 Thread(s)

    Default

    The best way to describe this is by building an image for you. ..now imagine me I'm selling coffee to a guy who has his hands full and manages yo sneak his wallet to me to take the fee for the coffee. I think nothing of it in terms of meaning just that the guy is a friend who wants me to grab yhe money for him. An Fe base interjects this action which is a clue to the guys motivations...that of TRUST. He trusts me therefore he does this....external actions belie clues of internal motivations. I already trust the guy so I need no external actions or clues.

  19. #19

    Default

    In addition to what @The Ineffable said I think the conscious attitude is that it's not worth using, but that people deny the relevance of their ignoring function to their detriment. In situations where the base is heavily affected, it unconsciously "braces" itself to receive more information and becomes increasingly aggressive about getting it, over-responding to whatever is received. Thus people become "slaves" to their ignoring function, at least until they begin consciously using it and no longer letting it 'run on automatic'.

  20. #20
    Pookie's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    TIM
    IEI-Ni 6w5-9-2 So/Sx
    Posts
    2,131
    Mentioned
    89 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I see holes in my ignoring(ne). So I disregard its form and apply it to my base. Ignoring function is very much rip the meat off the chicken and throw away the bones.
    I would say that ethically you are still supposed to act as if you have unilateral responsibility; but simultaneously you have to be able to see the other as a fully autonomous, free, aware person.

    Medicalizing social problems has the additional benefit of rendering society not responsible for those social ills. If itís a disease, itís nobodyís fault. Yay empiricism.

  21. #21
    Haikus Beautiful sky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    EII land
    TIM
    EII INFj
    Posts
    22,740
    Mentioned
    531 Post(s)
    Tagged
    6 Thread(s)

    Default

    IEI are used to forcing people by the means of directly getting in the way of them from doing things like this:

    Gordon Ramsey is SLE and she's IEI...listen to what she does when he wants her to do something. This would drive my dual insane...lol

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=txw5GR3474E

  22. #22
    2 EVIL I golden's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Several stories high
    TIM
    EIE prob 6
    Posts
    2,969
    Mentioned
    106 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pookie View Post
    Trollish derail on my part, but i dont think you can use Thus and then follow it with Might. Thus is certain. Might incorporates doubt. Your Conjunction is in the wrong function.
    Quote Originally Posted by The Foundation View Post
    Eh, English. Sue me.

    Just as long as the point that I'm skeptical about sub-type comes across.
     
    To add to the trolling, "thus" means "it follows." It could be used to mean certainty in some contexts, I suppose, but in general usage it just sets up the next thought. If the next thought is expressed in the conditional tense, it shouldn't matter. It's not the same as introducing a strict logical consequence, which is better expressed as "therefore," which actually does mean "as a consequence."


    As for the ignoring function, as far as I can tell, I ignore it. It's sometimes hard for me to pay attention to, or take seriously , information coming in that form.

  23. #23
    Breaking stereotypes Suz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    On a chatbox diet
    TIM
    IDK
    Posts
    6,470
    Mentioned
    169 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GOLDEN View Post

    As for the ignoring function, as far as I can tell, I ignore it. It's sometimes hard for me to pay attention to, or take seriously , information coming in that form.
    What do you mean by that?
    Enneagram: 9w1 6w5 2w3 so/sx

  24. #24
    2 EVIL I golden's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Several stories high
    TIM
    EIE prob 6
    Posts
    2,969
    Mentioned
    106 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Suz View Post
    What do you mean by that?
    I think the term "ignoring" actually captures this function well. It sometimes becomes clear to me when dealing with Fi-leading that I'm kind of ... actively impervious to Fi. I find myself getting into disagreements with dominant types, apparently because of different ways of evaluating and describing things, and what appears to be a different perception of where boundaries lie.

    I realize that I'm probably misperceiving ers once the problem starts rolling, and then my go-to action is to disengage because there's no real resolution possible. The reason being that, for my part, the deeper the conflict, the more firmly I push away their communication. (In the case of ISFj, I can usually find more common ground as a workaround.)

    However, this is not true with all Fi-leading people, as there are plenty of socionics "non-ideal" relationships in my life that work just fine.

  25. #25
    Breaking stereotypes Suz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    On a chatbox diet
    TIM
    IDK
    Posts
    6,470
    Mentioned
    169 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Ineffable View Post
    I think the Ignoring function is the "devil is in the details", or sometimes the "90% perspiration" function. I find that types minimize their contrary attitudes solely when they boast it, not as a state. Basically people are very strong in their Ignoring function and *could* do everything based on it "at any time", just they *don't* do it in order to produce value over it. They think it's too easy and foolish, because it is unvalued - they minimize its importance. For instance, Ti-Base types are interested in the correct reasoning, rather than correct premises; they think there is a lot of work in setting in place the system, while applying it is a mere formality. The vice-verse is valid.

    I think this rule applies to the full ID block, not just the Ignoring function. One may, however, insist on these functions when dealing people of blind and/or painful spots on them (e.i. Dual, Illusionary, Semi-Dual). It's sort of:
    - most of the time: "we don't have time for this"
    - when someone fails at or rejects them: "you have to not oppose / overlook this entirely".
    what is the distinction between a "reasoning" and a "premise"?
    Enneagram: 9w1 6w5 2w3 so/sx

  26. #26
    ouronis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    TIM
    &*self
    Posts
    867
    Mentioned
    43 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Suz View Post
    what is the distinction between a "reasoning" and a "premise"?
    A premise is what reasoning uses to orient itself. For example:

    Premise 1:Boys are blue.
    Premise 2:Girls are pink.
    Reasoning: Girls and boys are not the same color.

    Premise 1: Murder is wrong.
    Premise 2: Abortion is murder.
    Reasoning:Abortion is wrong.

    These are probably too simple to be good examples but ...you know.

  27. #27
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    TIM
    SLE/LSE sx/sp
    Posts
    2,489
    Mentioned
    76 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ouronis View Post
    A premise is what reasoning uses to orient itself. For example:

    Premise 1:Boys are blue.
    Premise 2:Girls are pink.
    Reasoning: Girls and boys are not the same color.

    Premise 1: Murder is wrong.
    Premise 2: Abortion is murder.
    Reasoning:Abortion is wrong.

    These are probably too simple to be good examples but ...you know.
    Good examples, now which one if we called a difference is Ti or Te do you think?

  28. #28
    ouronis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    TIM
    &*self
    Posts
    867
    Mentioned
    43 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Words View Post
    Good examples, now which one if we called a difference is Ti or Te do you think?
    Uhh, well not to completely agree with ineffable, but generally Ti is focused on keeping the organization of premises via reasoning straight and Te is not so much. Don't think that's all there is to it though, but at the moment I can't think of why. Ideally, your ego functions work together to provide both correct reasoning and correct premises, but the difference between the two can probably only be expressed meaningfully through a comparison of the accepting/producing processes.

    I think ineffable pretty much nailed the Id dynamics though.

Posting Permissions

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