How do you cope with your PoLR? Reactions and compensation.

[Korpsy Knievel]

Maritsa is mistaken as usual, which makes her an excellent authority for a confused dumbass like dja to follow.

[Azure Flame]

So Ti is anchored in what ISN'T observable and objective?

[Scapegrace]

None of you know what you're talking about. Stop trying to wrap your puny little brains around Te and listen to Maritsa.

[Azure Flame]

Yes, especially when that tard is an impostor of a Ti ego who's flopsweating before an audience that knows better.

Then the audience is obviously full of retards.

[InvisibleJim]

So Ti is anchored in what ISN'T observable and objective?

In short : Yes.

[Azure Flame]

But what makes something objective and observable?

[InvisibleJim]

But what makes something objective and observable?

... Really? :/

[Azure Flame]

... Really? :/

Look, a Ti user is capable of realizing that a rock is a rock and will always be a rock until acted upon by another force. It is an objective fact that the rock is what it is.

It is not, however, objective fact that E=MC^2. That is only an assumption resting on top of other facts., which are also resting on top of other facts. You can only bury the poll so deep into the ground until its firm enough that it won't fall over.

[Absurd]

Look, a Ti user is capable of realizing that a rock is a rock and will always be a rock until acted upon by another force. It is an objective fact that the rock is what it is.

If you use a geologist's hammer to break up a rock, it is not going to be a rock anymore?

And magically turns into a monkey?

[InvisibleJim]

Look, a Ti user is capable of realizing that a rock is a rock and will always be a rock until acted upon by another force. It is an objective fact that the rock is what it is.

It is not, however, objective fact that E=MC^2. That is only an assumption resting on top of other facts., which are also resting on top of other facts. You can only bury the poll so deep into the ground until its firm enough that it won't fall over.

Ask a stupid question, get a stupid answer.

The answer lies in functional interaction. Observe your IEI deriving a mathematical 'friendship quality by dichotomy' - there are a few threads out there. They assign willynilly numerical values to the problem which have no 'objective or observable' reality basis.

How can I use objective in this way? Because the objective in typing systems is not to derive the entire ability of people to be friends; it does highlight 'high fidelity' information transfer; e.g. Duals: but not that the information is what you want to hear.

Therefore the objective is wrong and one can observe that the logic is flawed when put into practice. That is what Te 'thinks' when if sees Ti not being tethered to empirical inspection and appropriate analysis boundaries.

It is merely an act of prioritisation whether one has flexibility into the other attitude. IEI being one of the special cases where Te is in the PoLR and thus actively ignored/disdained.

Therefore please observe that I just brought your thread full circle: to its objective.

[InvisibleJim]

Interesting tidbit: E=mc2 was 'observed' in laboratory conditions to be correct with 0.0004% error in 2005.

[Azure Flame]

The answer lies in functional interaction.

which question are you answering? the difference between Te vs Ti or "what makes something objective?"

[InvisibleJim]

which question are you answering? the difference between Te vs Ti or "what makes something objective?"

I answered both.

I recommend you ask an IEE what Ti PoLR is like to better understand Ti.

[Azure Flame]

@InvisibleJim, no you didn't, you're evading my questions and using circular logic and vagueness so you don't have to answer me.

What makes something objective? I dare you to answer in under 10 words.

[InvisibleJim]

@InvisibleJim, no you didn't, you're evading my questions and using circular logic and vagueness so you don't have to answer me.

What makes something objective? I dare you to answer in under 10 words.

Wank wank wank.

Try again when you understand.

[ArchonAlarion]

Okay, I can accept that my anecdote wasn't about Fi or Fi polr, I wasn't really sure. I guess the way I felt about it at the time was more substantial than what can be explained here.

So Ti is anchored in what ISN'T observable and objective?

I may have an Ne bias, but the way I understand it, Ti adds conceptual dimensions that are not directly apparent in the objective information itself. Thinking (in general) spreads a causal-mechanical map over observation and reacts to the logic of the map, as opposed to irrational functions that react purely to what the observation seems to suggest based on it's perceivable qualities. For Te, the properties of the component concepts that make up the structure and dynamism of the map are defined relative to empirical forms and activity. In Ti, the properties reference psychic images and primordial archetypes that echo the structure of the limits of human conception. So, in their purest and most extreme forms, the Te map would become so detailed as to be identical with the territory and the Ti map would become so abstract as to be identical with sheer awareness of the self's separation from the territory.

By "psychic images and primordial archetypes" I don't mean something mystical; I mean the limits and contours of conception that appear to the conscious mind in some form (often visual). A sort of logical imagination that breaks or makes ideas by throwing them against various imagined circumstances, which may have, but probably have not occurred in objective reality. Nevertheless they are "conceivable" and that itself is the standard by which the scenario is judged to be valid (your sore-throat anecdote, for instance). Thus, Ti tends towards the most abstract and universal applications of thought, the purely theoretical or artistic. Of course, when the criterion of validity is the limit of logical imagination, the end of the road is a content-less form of perfect logic, which has no apparent application or presence in reality. Also, because any given Ti dominant is bound to be biased, the forms (or the choice of forms given priority) are bound to be flavored with certain personal, whimsical, or otherwise subjective influences.

"Whereas the latter sinks to the level of a mere presentation of facts, the former evaporates into a representation of the unknowable, which is even beyond everything that could be expressed in an image. The presentation of facts has a certain incontestable truth, because the subjective factor is excluded and the facts speak for themselves. Similarly, the representing of the unknowable has also an immediate, subjective, and convincing power, because it is demonstrable from its own existence. The former says 'Est, ergo est' ('It is ; therefore it is') ; while the latter says 'Cogito, ergo cogito' (' I think ; therefore I think'). In the last analysis, introverted thinking arrives at the evidence of its own subjective being, while extraverted thinking is driven to the evidence of its complete identity with the objective fact. For, while the extravert really denies himself in his complete dispersion among objects, the introvert, by ridding himself of each and every content, has to content himself with his mere existence."

- Fuhrer Jung

[Azure Flame]

@InvisibleJim, I am only left more convinced that Te users speak through Fi in logical debates and don't actually have the ability to justify any claims they make.

[InvisibleJim]

@InvisibleJim, I am only left more convinced that Te users speak through Fi in logical debates and don't actually have the ability to justify any claims they make.

That is a personal problem. You have been given all of the puzzle pieces you require to form an accurate opinion with many additional high quality nuggets you cant get anywhere else.

You are now fishing for some kind of personal gratification, so here is another loan of information which I have little confidence you will repay with the proper interest: Go use this information and contribute by adding value: that is how you will gain the respect/'esteem' you are working hard to find with all of the wrong methods.

If you arent willing to do that then bon voyage and I hope you reach obscurity safe and sound.

On that note I also recommend you leave reductionism to the negatvists aka the professionals.

[Azure Flame]

"Whereas the latter sinks to the level of a mere presentation of facts, the former evaporates into a representation of the unknowable, which is even beyond everything that could be expressed in an image. The presentation of facts has a certain incontestable truth, because the subjective factor is excluded and the facts speak for themselves. Similarly, the representing of the unknowable has also an immediate, subjective, and convincing power, because it is demonstrable from its own existence. The former says 'Est, ergo est' ('It is ; therefore it is') ; while the latter says 'Cogito, ergo cogito' (' I think ; therefore I think'). In the last analysis, introverted thinking arrives at the evidence of its own subjective being, while extraverted thinking is driven to the evidence of its complete identity with the objective fact. For, while the extravert really denies himself in his complete dispersion among objects, the introvert, by ridding himself of each and every content, has to content himself with his mere existence."

- Fuhrer Jung

Ok I understand now. its like how Steven Hawking is theorizing about positrons and negatrons (megatron?) forming and disappearing about the theoretical infinitely small edge of a black hole, etc. All the math adds up, but we have no idea if its true or not.

I've seen that before. Primarily from my ENTp ex. She'd talk about how she was going to journey into hell and bring god's light with her. I just laughed and told her that's not how the bible works.

A lot of the things she used to say could be responded with "It would be cool if that were true... but..." She drove me crazy because none of it would actually be real or practical. She would explain to me how jesus was actually created from this and that and was a live person and that religion is actually the accumulation of whatever... And it would all make sense, at least temporarily, then I'd spend 2 minutes thinking it over like, "wtf did she just convince me to believe?!"

I wonder if that's the difference between Ne and Se? Ne Ti is more tied to the abstract realm while Se Ti is more verifiable and concrete? In fact... I bet that's what they mean when they say SLE's hate "theoretical" stuff. Stuff that can't be used or proven true. Its a waste of time to me. CHA-CHING

[Azure Flame]

On that note I also recommend you leave reductionism to the negatvists aka the professionals.

Alright, sounds like a plan. The negativists are in fact better than me.

[ArchonAlarion]

Well, theorizing is widely accepted to be a legitimate part of science, something any type could engage in. With introverted thinkers, the theorization is simply a result of the reliance on the logical imagination, and distinct from scientific theorization, is not necessarily limited or submissive to a notion of objective application or acceptance. It tends to be engaged in as an end in itself, as if the point of life is this experience of conceptual mapping with the mind containing all possible derivations of thought, without objective experience ever entering in the equation. That is the extreme/neurotic way it manifests anyways. In normal and well balanced people, the dominant function does not subsume all of conscious thought and so it does not become the ultimate end of life to the detriment of the other functions, which would be repressed into the unconscious otherwise (Fe becoming the most repressed in the case of dominant Ti).

[FoxOnStilts]

I wonder if that's the difference between Ne and Se? Ne Ti is more tied to the abstract realm while Se Ti is more verifiable and concrete? In fact... I bet that's what they mean when they say SLE's hate "theoretical" stuff. Stuff that can't be used or proven true. Its a waste of time to me. CHA-CHING

Concrete vs abstract is one of the biggest generalizations of S vs N, and, as such, is prone to more people being exceptions to that rule.

There are Se types who are interested in theory and abstractions, and Ne types who aren't. It depends on why they're interested/uninterested in these things rather than the fact that they are.

[Azure Flame]

That isn't what I said nor implied. What the fuck is up with you and such crude binary thinking? Argh.

Te vs. Ti is basically a difference in epistemic foundations, that is, from what sources one's reasoning primarily begins; Te begins from the objective, Ti from the subjective. After that point onwards there's largely little difference between them.

that was a good explanation. Also I'm an absolutist, my brother complains about it a lot. Idunno why I'm this way, best I can do is say Se or Fi polr has something to do with it but I don't actually know.

[Azure Flame]

Become a more nuanced thinker, else people may suspect you are bad genes.

Eh, too late for me then.

[lemontrees]

I may have an Ne bias, but the way I understand it, Ti adds conceptual dimensions that are not directly apparent in the objective information itself. Thinking (in general) spreads a causal-mechanical map over observation and reacts to the logic of the map, as opposed to irrational functions that react purely to what the observation seems to suggest based on it's perceivable qualities. For Te, the properties of the component concepts that make up the structure and dynamism of the map are defined relative to empirical forms and activity. In Ti, the properties reference psychic images and primordial archetypes that echo the structure of the limits of human conception. So, in their purest and most extreme forms, the Te map would become so detailed as to be identical with the territory and the Ti map would become so abstract as to be identical with sheer awareness of the self's separation from the territory.

That's a really lovely way of articulating it, AA.

...I actually feel really moved, like I need to go dance through the streets, have a cigarette to clear my mind, or have sex now.

[Azure Flame]

That's a really lovely way of articulating it, AA.

...I actually feel really moved, like I need to go dance through the streets, have a cigarette to clear my mind, or have sex now.

lmao! archon's a pimp like that.

[Ozz]

What does getting to the point have to do with evaluating a large number of possibilities?

Of course it does. If you got a million possibilities, then you got to evaluate/compare and contrast each based on different viewpoints. It's tedious work. I don't trust my gut feeling, so I get annoyed when someone bring up superficial possibilities even when my gut feeling say they are crap.

[Park]

Of course it does. If you got a million possibilities, then you got to evaluate/compare and contrast each based on different viewpoints. It's tedious work. I don't trust my gut feeling, so I get annoyed when someone bring up superficial possibilities even when my gut feeling say they are crap.

"Getting to the point" usually refers to arriving to the most important/essential part or topic in a discussion. Reaching this state may or may not require the evaluation of different possibilities or viewpoints, but is in no way directly related to it. And what if the main point of a discussion is comparing different viewpoints?

[Ozz]

"Getting to the point" usually refers to arriving to the most important/essential part or topic in a discussion. Reaching this state may or may not require the evaluation of different possibilities or viewpoints, but is in no way directly related to it. And what if the main point of a discussion is comparing different viewpoints?

I didn't really mean the main point of a discussion at all. It was a bad choice of words - the side effect of posting from work.

[Park]

I didn't really mean the main point of a discussion at all. It was a bad choice of words - the side effect of posting from work.

What did you mean?

[blackburry]

@Ashton, i think dja may need some real life examples. he still doesn't seem to understand

[ashlesha]

then perhaps you could offer some real life examples.

i don't expect him to ever understand.

[Ryan]

Ashton's definitions are not relevant anyway, for someone who just wants to understand the functions, and not the ideas behind them.

Saying that Te is capable of logical reasoning is incorrect, which both he and DJA implied. It misses the whole point of having 8 separate functions, as opposed to the typical 4 functions in MBTI, or the two dominant Jung functions in his definition of type - which ironically is what makes Socionics more interesting.

[Suz]

The way I see my POLR (Ti) is basically as a hindrance to flow of information I find to be most valuable, which is the Te format. In fact Te information and help is something I crave, need, and love. I get majorly annoyed with people who get in the way of that.

Ti types tend to withhold info that I find useful, and give me info that may not make a whole lot of sense to me. I feel like they often also expect me to just magically guess or know certain things (I think this is the case for Ti-types as well as Ti-VALUERS), which in my mind may not necessarily be a safe assumption to make.

[Absurd]

Well, for a guy who doesn't know what he is talking about nor can't type himself. I say, can't, for at some point in time he's going to change that self-typing of his. Hell, few people that did type him before already did that, so it is just a matter of time.

[Ryan]

I don't see him changing his type, not out of uncertainty in any case.

[Creepy-pokeball]

Introverted logic () is an introverted, rational, and static information element. It is also called Ti, L, structural logic, or white logic.

is generally associated with the ability to recognize logical consistency and correctness, generate and apply classifications and systems, organize systematic and conceptual understanding, see logical connections between things (including logical similarities, differences, and correlations) by means of instinctive feelings of validity, symmetry, and even beauty. It is like common sense, in that it builds on one's expectations of reality, through a somewhat personal, though explicable, understanding of general truths and how they are manifested.

Types that value naturally question the consistency of beliefs that are taken for granted in everyday life. They strongly prefer to make decisions based on their own experience and judgement, as opposed to relying on external authorities for knowledge, which they use only as a last resort. They also have respect for people with clearly defined and internally consistent opinions, believing that a sense of internal certainty is necessary for orienting oneself in life. To these types, one's personal standards of truth are more reliable than public consensus.

They see overly pragmatic views as shallow, and try to limit public discussion of mundane practical matters. They are especially sensitive to redundant information.
-------------------

Ti, theoretically, to an ENFp would be a violation of the overarching globalized, abstract boundary-less, yet static, perception an ENFp lives within, as it applies it to itself, others, and its creative splurges into the world.

[Absurd]

I don't see him changing his type, not out of uncertainty in any case.

What you see is what you get? Heh.

He has been typed and self-typed LIE before, if my memory serves me right, so you not seeing something doesn't mean it didn't happen. Fact is a fact, I'm afraid. It happened.

Not to mention some other types. And type doesn't change, for something like that to be even possible one is going to have to undergo a change himself, a drastic change, a qualitative change.

[Ryan]

What you see is what you get? Heh.

He has been typed and self-typed LIE before, if my memory serves me right, so you not seeing something doesn't mean it didn't happen. Fact is a fact, I'm afraid. It happened.

Not to mention some other types. And type doesn't change, for something like that to be even possible one is going to have to undergo a change himself, a drastic change, a qualitative change.

I give more credit to people who have typed themselves correctly to remain certain of their type. Their past is of no consequence in this case.

[anndelise]

Introverted logic () is an introverted, rational, and static information element. It is also called Ti, L, structural logic, or white logic.

is generally associated with the ability to recognize logical consistency and correctness, generate and apply classifications and systems, organize systematic and conceptual understanding, see logical connections between things (including logical similarities, differences, and correlations) by means of instinctive feelings of validity, symmetry, and even beauty. It is like common sense, in that it builds on one's expectations of reality, through a somewhat personal, though explicable, understanding of general truths and how they are manifested.

Types that value naturally question the consistency of beliefs that are taken for granted in everyday life. They strongly prefer to make decisions based on their own experience and judgement, as opposed to relying on external authorities for knowledge, which they use only as a last resort. They also have respect for people with clearly defined and internally consistent opinions, believing that a sense of internal certainty is necessary for orienting oneself in life. To these types, one's personal standards of truth are more reliable than public consensus.

They see overly pragmatic views as shallow, and try to limit public discussion of mundane practical matters. They are especially sensitive to redundant information.
-------------------

Ti, theoretically, to an ENFp would be a violation of the overarching globalized, abstract boundary-less, yet static, perception an ENFp lives within, as it applies it to itself, others, and its creative splurges into the world.

I don't fully agree with this description.
The rest of this post isn't particularly directed at you.

------
Both Ti and Fi are static + relational elements. They both deal with similarities, differences, and other 'structural' relationships between things/people/ideas/etc.

They differ in that the Ti element attends to the explicit similarities, differences, etc, while the Fi element attends to implicit similarities, differences, etc. Ti can give a formulaic connection, where another person might be able to follow along to see how the conclusion was drawn. But Fi types have a difficult time expressing how they derived the implicated connections which they see. They have a 'feeling' that the structural connections are there, but they can't explain it to others very well. For Fi ego types, it's easier to show the pieces involved so the other person can infer for themselves the connections from those pieces. While for Ti ego types, the formula (or connections given) should be enough.

Take as an example...socionics.
The elements which makes up socionics are rather ill-defined and abstract. But socionics has an extensive and well-defined formula for how those elements fit together to make a type and/or inter-type relationships. Because the formula/structure is so clear, surely it must be 'true', yes?
Socionics is an example of Ne+Ti theory.

The flip side of socionics comes from the people that want the elements themselves to be well-defined...and preferably without having to describe them by comparing elements to other elements. If the elements were clearly defined...AND readily observable in such a way that it's obvious which behavior/whatever meant which element, and only that element...
Then the formula wouldn't matter, as the relationships between these well-defined elements could be readily inferred.

But socionics wasn't created that way. Unfortunately, the ill-defined nature of the elements...as typically practiced...leaves it open to argue over what the hell the elements mean...and how they can be defined. Because of this, we get socionics practitioners who take the ill-defined elements, and try to associate specific behaviors to each element. Such as Chi belongs to Se, or concern for health/comfort belongs to Si, etc. But these simplistic associations fail to consider that there are multiple ways that such things can be processed in the mindbody.

How I feel towards my Ti polr / Te HA is aggravation at how much information must be set aside in an effort to communicate even a portion of it. I don't particularly want to ignore all that info, and I do get rather irked...maybe even pissed off...when I'm trying to communicate a concept...but to do so I too am having to set aside some info. It cannot all be communicated at once...just in bits and pieces. Such is the nature of a linear language. It's far easier to just not even deal with trying to communicate it. And certainly less aggravating to avoid reading other people's attempts,

One of the things that bugs me about people who are confident in their logical abilities, is the ones who ignore that it doesn't matter how perfect or elegant the formula is if the basic premises for it are off. I would far rather know clearly the premises and draw my own conclusions from them...than to have someone give me their conclusion without offering any of the premises which they drew from.

----
And in final...i'm not even sure if the above makes any sense. I'm completely mentally and emotionally exhausted. Time to crawl back into e-space and just watch.