Does strong :Te: imply weaker relative :Ti:?

[Phaedrus]

if you could provide an example of that, it would prove helpful.

If I understand the dichotomy correctly, this IS the example.

why not...
"could you provide an exaple?"
"provide an example please"
"I need you to give me an example"

You're not trying to talk him into giving you an example. You're just sayin´ that if he were to provide you with an example, it would be helpful. You're not starting anything here, provoking him to act in some way. You're just saying that it would prove helpful.

To ask for an example is also an indication of stronger than .

[science as magic]

To ask for an example is also an indication of stronger than .

No. Of strong

[aestrivex]

...which is all thoroughly irrelevant to the topic at hand.

[Gilly]

To ask for an example is also an indication of stronger than .

No. Of strong

Wrong again. > preference.

[science as magic]

Having strong Te is not the equivalent of having weaker Ti imo. The functions seem to work dynamically and bolster growth in one another. stupid entjs will not try to understand a matter thoroughly and smart ixfps will

[Gilly]

This is true. Stronger Ti =/ weaker Te. Think about it this way: If an LIE is logical subtype, he's closer to LSE, whereas the intuitive subtype is closer to EIE. Now, who has stronger Ti, EIE or LSE? There you go.

[science as magic]

then why is "To ask for an example an indication of stronger than "?

[Gilly]

It's not. Like I said, it's a Te>Ti preference. There's a difference.

[science as magic]

i do not think the relative preferences are absolute either. i think of them as functions of functional development

[Gilly]

i do not think the relative preferences are absolute either.

And what exactly do you mean by "functions of functional development?"

[science as magic]

as one develops their ability to use their functions they reject less data that applies to their respective functions

inverse relationship between development of and rejection of it

[Gilly]

Ok...So what's your point?

[science as magic]

No. You reiterated this:

To ask for an example is also an indication of stronger than .

saying that it was an example of > preference

so not just mutual development but mutual appreciation (?)

[Gilly]

No. Te>Ti preference does not indicate Te>Ti strength. IXFjs have Ti>Te, but prefer Te>Ti.

I don't disagree.

[Phaedrus]

It's not. Like I said, it's a Te>Ti preference. There's a difference.

Whatever. I was mainly thinking of a Te>Ti preference. And if that is a general pattern, like if someone usually would like to understand what someone else means through examples, that would probably indicate a type with in the ego block. At least it is not typical of INTjs.

[science as magic]

as you will

Te>Ti preference does not indicate Te>Ti strength.

We are in concurrence.

[Gilly]

I realized.

[Ms. Kensington]

this kind of reminds me of something I was thinking about earlier today: how this issue relates with the relative strengths of your dual seeking functions. For example, if an INTj has strong Ti and Te, but just prefers Ti and uses it more, do they also have a strong Fi and Fe? And an INFj, they would have a strong Fe, but would they have as strong a Ti than the Te? I believe the theory says that the role is not strong, but it seems as if there is a discrepency.

[FDG]

as one develops their ability to use their functions they reject less data that applies to their respective functions

inverse relationship between development of and rejection of it

Would you place a limit to it, or, as gurus say, it's the sky?

[Ms. Kensington]

this kind of reminds me of something I was thinking about earlier today: how this issue relates with the relative strengths of your dual seeking functions. For example, if an INTj has strong Ti and Te, but just prefers Ti and uses it more, do they also have a strong Fi and Fe? And an INFj, they would have a strong Fe, but would they have as strong a Ti than the Te?

[Not A Communist Shill]

This is true. Stronger Ti =/ weaker Te. Think about it this way: If an LIE is logical subtype, he's closer to LSE, whereas the intuitive subtype is closer to EIE. Now, who has stronger Ti, EIE or LSE? There you go.

ENFj would have stronger in this case, wouldn't it? A ESTj type would be further away from than ENFj.

I see vs. , vs. etc. as like an iceberg - if you pull the iceberg out of the water, the (above-surface ice) increases at the expense of (below-surface ice).

If a Ego block function is strong, it's opposite attitude (in the Id block) would be weaker in proportion.

If a SuperEgo block block is strong, it means that the preference for the opposite attitude (in the SuperId) will be equally strong, at the expense of the SuperEgo block function, which would have a weak preference.

[Not A Communist Shill]

this kind of reminds me of something I was thinking about earlier today: how this issue relates with the relative strengths of your dual seeking functions. For example, if an INTj has strong Ti and Te, but just prefers Ti and uses it more, do they also have a strong Fi and Fe? And an INFj, they would have a strong Fe, but would they have as strong a Ti than the Te? I believe the theory says that the role is not strong, but it seems as if there is a discrepency.

If a INTj has a strong , their will be weak, if their is slightly weaker than their , their will be stronger than their (but they won't like it, being a SuperEgo function.

(IMO).

[Republicus]

Thinking is the process where by one thought is compared to another, judged against another. Judgment presupposes a criteria, Te and Ti are the same processes but with different criteria. That which makes Ti strong also makes Te strong, and visa versa.

It is simply that in active thought, and possibly passive as well, one criteria is suppressed.
What determines how much one criteria is suppressed is determined by the ego, and this degree of suppression varies for everyone.

Therefore the ‘weakness’ or ‘strength’ of a function is determined more by how much it is used by the ego, or how related the function is to functions used by the ego. I also believe the level of suppression depends on the complexity and nature of what is being analyzed.

Consider the thinking problem, is a square a triangle? No, it is not. But does one need to rely heavily on objective of subjective material for that determination? I don’t believe so, I think that the simplistic nature of the comparison and objects involved tells us this through common sense. A more complicated problem though would require a better differentiate criteria. For instance, should the capital gains tax be eliminated, or change to a progressive tax system? Now we need more information to make a judgment, where do we get it? Enter subjectivity and objectivity, introversion and extroversion. My example isn’t great, because it doesn’t preclude analysis on other means, but I think I made my point.

A Te will have a strong Ti. Probably as strong as Te itself, it is simply repressed in active thought. Theoretically, in passive thought any function would be performing tasks at an equal competency level to its objective or subjective counter part.

I would suspect that introspection might make this impossible to see. I am basing my conclusion strictly on theory.

On a side note:
Ti and Te can and do at times present the same conclusions given the same material.
Ti and Te are the method, and not the end result, the end result doesn’t always reflect the method.

[Not A Communist Shill]

A Te will have a strong Ti. Probably as strong as Te itself, it is simply repressed in active thought. Theoretically, in passive thought any function would be performing tasks at an equal competency level to its objective or subjective counter part.

I would suspect that introspection might make this impossible to see. I am basing my conclusion strictly on theory.

On a side note:
Ti and Te can and do at times present the same conclusions given the same material.
Ti and Te are the method, and not the end result, the end result doesn’t always reflect the method.

I think this may be true, but there are different blocks of conscious\unconsciousnes as well as like\dislike - the same function in one block doesn't manifest the same as in a different block, true - but this is the very reason why they are not compatiable IMO.

If is one thing, e.g. inductive logic, and another e.g. deductive logic, you cannot utilise both at the same time on the same piece of logic. However, you can use them concurrently on different perceptions, or at different times with the same perceptions. I think in a dominant type, for example, the comes so naturally it isn't even in the consciousness and so isn't outwardly apparent. There are some times when logic is utilised from the external environment and utilised deep inside which the type doesn't need to justify through - it's seemingly innate. The is also innate, but it is at the very core of the person's self, and so is heavily scrutinised and utilised, at the expense of - strong at a particular moment must mean weak .

[Not A Communist Shill]

On a side note:
Ti and Te can and do at times present the same conclusions given the same material.
Ti and Te are the method, and not the end result, the end result doesn’t always reflect the method.

is the end result (and method) in Static Ixxj types because it allows the Statics to know what to do in the moment, is the end result in Exxj Dynamic types, but the method is mapped out by the perceiving function.

[krieger]

It is currently my understanding that a person with Ti preference expects and excercizes Fe in the realm of extraverted judgment. From the viewpoint of such a person, Te is seen as a travesty of that function: 'who are they to tell me external judgment should be all about facts?'.

Of course multiple such attitudes are present at the same time: 'why all the factual legwork when common sense tells you ...?' and 'you just expect me to get into my role function to complement that?'.

Whenever I watch a scientific debate (Te galore) I see the happenings in very general terms: good, evil, wishes, dreams and intentions. Every argument being made is a punch thrown in a petty emotional squabble. In my eyes the question is never how to get the issues resolved, but how to make the fighting stop as quickly and cleanly as possible. This is what I experience as a Te scene seen through the Fe function's eyes.

[FDG]

It is currently my understanding that a person with Ti preference expects and excercizes Fe in the realm of extraverted judgment. From the viewpoint of such a person, Te is seen as a travesty of that function: 'who are they to tell me external judgment should be all about facts?'.

Of course multiple such attitudes are present at the same time: 'why all the factual legwork when common sense tells you ...?' and 'you just expect me to get into my role function to complement that?'.

Whenever I watch a scientific debate (Te galore) I see the happenings in very general terms: good, evil, wishes, dreams and intentions. Every argument being made is a punch thrown in a petty emotional squabble. In my eyes the question is never how to get the issues resolved, but how to make the fighting stop as quickly and cleanly as possible. This is what I experience as a Te scene seen through the Fe function's eyes.

Awesome, labcoat. You always make so much sense. Here, some

[Republicus]

In response to labcoat:
My understanding would make this impossible, as a Ti wouldn't ever use Fe, and may not really be able to do so. I'm curious why you think they would.

What I am really curios about is why you say that there would be a time when someone who for instance is Ti, would need or want to use an extraverted judging function. I thought functions were used as a persons preferences, what condition could force the use of a function?

[FDG]

In response to labcoat:
My understanding would make this impossible, as a Ti wouldn't ever use Fe, and may not really be able to do so. I'm curious why you think they would.

What I am really curios about is why you say that there would be a time when someone who for instance is Ti, would need or want to use an extraverted judging function. I thought functions were used as a persons preferences, what condition could force the use of a function?

Oh, I think his example was clear. When another person uses , being the INTj's frame of reference , he is going to use to filter the information since is the preferred extraverted judging function.

[Republicus]

since is the preferred extraverted judging function.

Of an INTj? I don't think so. Fe is the most repressed of all functions.

[FDG]

since is the preferred extraverted judging function.

Of an INTj? I don't think so. Fe is the most repressed of all functions.

Argh. I said that it's the function that they utilize to gather the extraverted judging data, NOT the function that they actively utilize! Besides, Se is the most repressed function of INTjs.

[krieger]

'Use' is probably not the right word for describing what an INTj 'does' with Fe, but I do strongly believe the function plays a major part in the way we see reality. If Ti sepparates all information that is useful to the Ti function, what remains is everything that Ti is not: it's inverse, Fe. Even though this part of the experience is what we would normally call unconscious, one is never fully unaware of it. Compare it to the dark part of a crescent moon; it's existence is implied by the part that is visible, in such a way that it attains visibility of it's own.

In socionical terms: Ti and Fe form an axis, one taking care of bussiness in the static world, the other supplementing it in the dynamic world, solving the problems that the other was barred from seeing. Even being eachothers' inverse the functions have an important thing in common: they agree on what is a positive movement. Hence, the two will be in accordance on many, many issues.

The way I see it, every function, even those a person doesn't posess, gets recognized in the outer world, and is understood by being contrasted to a person's own preferences.

[Republicus]

Argh. I said that it's the function that they utilize to gather the extraverted judging data, NOT the function that they actively utilize! Besides, Se is the most repressed function of INTjs.

How do they use something passively? I don't believe socionics claims Se is the most repressed.

I think I now understand what you mean about the funcitons, I don't understand why one would need to gather extraverted judging data.

[FDG]

Argh. I said that it's the function that they utilize to gather the extraverted judging data, NOT the function that they actively utilize! Besides, Se is the most repressed function of INTjs.

How do they use something passively? I don't believe socionics claims Se is the most repressed.

I think I now understand what you mean about the funcitons, I don't understand why one would need to gather extraverted judging data.

Because otherwise, where do you get that information from? You have TI for the introverted judgement, Ne for the extraverted perception, Si for the introverted perception, Fe for the extraverted judgement.

[Republicus]

'Use' is probably not the right word for describing what an INTj 'does' with Fe, but I do strongly believe the function plays a major part in the way we see reality. If Ti sepparates all information that is useful to the Ti function, what remains is everything that Ti is not: it's inverse, Fe. Even though this part of the experience is what we would normally call unconscious, one is never fully unaware of it. Compare it to the dark part of a crescent moon; it's existence is implied by the part that is visible, in such a way that it attains visibility of it's own.

In socionical terms: Ti and Fe form an axis, one taking care of bussiness in the static world, the other supplementing it in the dynamic world, solving the problems that the other was barred from seeing. Even being eachothers' inverse the functions have an important thing in common: they agree on what is a positive movement. Hence, the two will be in accordance on many, many issues.

The way I see it, every function, even those a person doesn't posess, gets recognized in the outer world, and is understood by being contrasted to a person's own preferences.

I would say that functions could have impact on ones behavior and conscious and unconscious mind as much by not being there as being there. Certain beliefs or thoughts could be as much as a deficiency in a processes as a strength in another. I think this is similar, if not the same thing, that you are expressing in your first and third paragraphs.

Your middle paragraph intrigues me, but I don't really understand. Could explain more, and possible explain why or how you came to think this?

[Republicus]

Because otherwise, where do you get that information from? You have TI for the introverted judgement, Ne for the extraverted perception, Si for the introverted perception, Fe for the extraverted judgement.

Okay, I don't know for sure either way, but I'll play along with this for awhile longer if you will indulge me.

Why do you say that we would need an extraverted and introverted judgement, and an extraverted and introverted perception. Why make whatever distinction you're making on those lines. Why not make on the function, we all need a feeling, a thinking, a sensing and an intuition. For an INTJ that would be Fi Ti Se and Ne. Or, we need all of them. And when dealing with sensing data why are you sure we only use one sensing function. We use both don't we? And one is more repressed.

[Smilingeyes]

'Use' is probably not the right word for describing what an INTj 'does' with Fe, but I do strongly believe the function plays a major part in the way we see reality. If Ti sepparates all information that is useful to the Ti function, what remains is everything that Ti is not: it's inverse, Fe. Even though this part of the experience is what we would normally call unconscious, one is never fully unaware of it. Compare it to the dark part of a crescent moon; it's existence is implied by the part that is visible, in such a way that it attains visibility of it's own.

In socionical terms: Ti and Fe form an axis, one taking care of bussiness in the static world, the other supplementing it in the dynamic world, solving the problems that the other was barred from seeing. Even being eachothers' inverse the functions have an important thing in common: they agree on what is a positive movement. Hence, the two will be in accordance on many, many issues.

The way I see it, every function, even those a person doesn't posess, gets recognized in the outer world, and is understood by being contrasted to a person's own preferences.

*the sound of two hands clapping*
Excellent.

[FDG]

Because otherwise, where do you get that information from? You have TI for the introverted judgement, Ne for the extraverted perception, Si for the introverted perception, Fe for the extraverted judgement.

Okay, I don't know for sure either way, but I'll play along with this for awhile longer if you will indulge me.

Why do you say that we would need an extraverted and introverted judgement, and an extraverted and introverted perception.

There's not exactly a need for it, but information whilist living comes in all the forms described; discrete, external; continous, external; continous, internal; discrete, internal.

Why make whatever distinction you're making on those lines. Why not make on the function, we all need a feeling, a thinking, a sensing and an intuition. For an INTJ that would be Fi Ti Se and Ne. Or, we need all of them. And when dealing with sensing data why are you sure we only use one sensing function. We use both don't we? And one is more repressed.

Ah, I see what you mean. Well, and INTj is defined as having Ti and Ne in the ego bloc. Naturally, their presence tends to repress the two functions that occupy the same band, namely Fi and Se. Therefore, those two - supposing that we still are speaking about the INTj person - cannot be used at the same point in time in which we are utilizing Ti and Ne, because they are naturally repressed. The alternatives, are, of course: on the flipside of feeling we have Fe, and on the flipside of sensing we have Si, which are not repressed because they are not in conflict with the two ego block functions.

[Republicus]

Ah, I see what you mean. Well, and INTj is defined as having Ti and Ne in the ego bloc. Naturally, their presence tends to repress the two functions that occupy the same band, namely Fi and Se. Therefore, those two - supposing that we still are speaking about the INTj person - cannot be used at the same point in time in which we are utilizing Ti and Ne, because they are naturally repressed. The alternatives, are, of course: on the flipside of feeling we have Fe, and on the flipside of sensing we have Si, which are not repressed because they are not in conflict with the two ego block functions.

hmmm

is this the Socionics view? it seems to conflict with Jungs view, then again he didn't use Se and Si, he just had S. It seems to me that Fe, being the most opposite of Ti would be the most ignored. When, if, an INTJ wanted to make a feeling judgment they would use Fi. Fe is so far off the scale of conscious direction it might as well not exist to the ego. I don't see why Fi would be more repressed than Fe in an INTj, seems the opposite would be true.

Why do you say in an INTj Fi is more repressed than Fe?

[anndelise]

Ah, I see what you mean. Well, and INTj is defined as having Ti and Ne in the ego bloc. Naturally, their presence tends to repress the two functions that occupy the same band, namely Fi and Se. Therefore, those two - supposing that we still are speaking about the INTj person - cannot be used at the same point in time in which we are utilizing Ti and Ne, because they are naturally repressed. The alternatives, are, of course: on the flipside of feeling we have Fe, and on the flipside of sensing we have Si, which are not repressed because they are not in conflict with the two ego block functions.

hmmm

is this the Socionics view? it seems to conflict with Jungs view, then again he didn't use Se and Si, he just had S. It seems to me that Fe, being the most opposite of Ti would be the most ignored. When, if, an INTJ wanted to make a feeling judgment they would use Fi. Fe is so far off the scale of conscious direction it might as well not exist to the ego. I don't see why Fi would be more repressed than Fe in an INTj, seems the opposite would be true.

Why do you say in an INTj Fi is more repressed than Fe?

just a couple of things and then i'll back out,

1. do you think it's easier to jump quadra values than to stay within the value's of one's own quadra?

2. also,
Ti used to be defined as external/static/field
Fi used to be defined as internal/static/field
Te used to be defined as external/dynamic/object
Fe used to be defined as internal/dynamic/object

if we have ti and te, we have external qualities of judgements competing
if we have ti and fi, we have static & field of judgements competing
if we have ti and fe, we have nothing the same, no competition, no repressing. even better, they compliment each other, allowing full access to the entire judging spectrum...both internal & external, both static & dynamic, both object & field. Kind of like two sides of the same coin...without one, the other doesn't exist.
(i suppose i could do better in this, but...i already forsee various arguements from others and don't want to get further involved in this)

3. [edited due to mistaken information]

4. also,
if we use "Fe is the most repressed function of an intj"
then it might follow that "dual seeking functions are the most repressed functions"
as an NeFi, particularly an (Ne)Fi, that would suggest that Si is my most repressed function. however, i utilize Si every time i open my eyes and walk around my house, yard, drive, etc. In essence, i would not be able to be mobile without extensive usage of Si information. Admittedly, it's easier for me if someone else does the driving etc allowing me to delve further into Ne thoughts, but when needed, it's far easier for me to access Si information than Se information.

now, i said "it might follow" because it's possible you only meant that repressed dual seeking only applies to Ti accepting, or Ti alphas, or IJs, or subtypes, etc etc