Page 1 of 13 1234511 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 502

Thread: Examples of Te PoLR in ISFps and INFps

  1. #1
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Examples of Te PoLR in ISFps and INFps

    Are IxFps reluctant to accept new information without understanding it's complexities and tying up any loose ends (other bits of information that don't fit in to their understanding of it all)?
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  2. #2
    Don't forget the the thehotelambush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    6,633
    Mentioned
    159 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: Is this a Te PoLR thing?

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy
    Are IxFps reluctant to accept new information without understanding it's complexities and tying up any loose ends (other bits of information that don't fit in to their understanding of it all)?
    Yes, and it's more a Ti HA thing.

  3. #3
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    It's difficult to separate the two (I also see the 3rd and 5th functions as being two different aspects of the same thing). From my perspective it seems like the super ego I'm seeing (I also have a hard time separating the 4th and 6th functions in ESFjs). An example would be socionics... an INFp may respond to you with incorrect or irrelevant information (say, assuming that something is a quality of a certain type because they believe people they know to be that type, and then using those examples as a response to what you're saying even if the premise of that typing has been challenged... in short, it looks like circular reasoning), and it's impossible to get them out of that mode unless you're willing to pretty much start from scratch and explain the entire theory in a way that they can understand it (and I'm talking about intelligent IxFps here).
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  4. #4
    Don't forget the the thehotelambush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    6,633
    Mentioned
    159 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy
    It's difficult to separate the two (I also see the 3rd and 5th functions as being two different aspects of the same thing).
    Yeah, they definitely are.

    From my perspective it seems like the super ego I'm seeing (I also have a hard time separating the 4th and 6th functions in ESFjs).
    The way I see the Te PoLR in IFps is when they feel the need to act like a professional person and do lots of unnecessary work because they feel they are expected to. It has a plodding, slow quality to it, and I want to tell them to just cut to the chase and do only what is absolutely necessary.

    An example would be socionics... an INFp may respond to you with incorrect or irrelevant information (say, assuming that something is a quality of a certain type because they believe people they know to be that type, and then using those examples as a response to what you're saying even if the premise of that typing has been challenged... in short, it looks like circular reasoning), and it's impossible to get them out of that mode unless you're willing to pretty much start from scratch and explain the entire theory in a way that they can understand it (and I'm talking about intelligent IxFps here).
    That might be "information" in the Te sense to an outsider, but it's a Ti conclusion that they have arrived at through Ti reasoning. So yes, it's both.

    But wanting everything to fit together is all Ti.

  5. #5
    escaping anndelise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    WA
    TIM
    IEE 649 sx/sp cp
    Posts
    6,338
    Mentioned
    210 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Hmmm, so a T ego type is willing to accept new information without understanding it and without seeing how it fits into their own understanding?
    IEE 649 sx/sp cp

  6. #6
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    That's not what I said.
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  7. #7
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thehotelambush
    The way I see the Te PoLR in IFps is when they feel the need to act like a professional person and do lots of unnecessary work because they feel they are expected to. It has a plodding, slow quality to it, and I want to tell them to just cut to the chase and do only what is absolutely necessary.
    interesting
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  8. #8
    escaping anndelise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    WA
    TIM
    IEE 649 sx/sp cp
    Posts
    6,338
    Mentioned
    210 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    ah, you're right, what you said suggests that it's actually a Te ego type that would be willing to accept new information without understanding it and without seeing how it fits into their own understanding?
    IEE 649 sx/sp cp

  9. #9
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I said nothing of the sort, nor implied it.
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  10. #10
    escaping anndelise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    WA
    TIM
    IEE 649 sx/sp cp
    Posts
    6,338
    Mentioned
    210 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    In case you haven't figured it out, my point is that even Te ego types would be reluctant to accept new information without understanding it (even if it's complex) and tying up any loose ends (other bits of information that don't fit in to their understanding of it all)?

    Hell, even a Fi ego type would be reluctant to accept new information without understanding it and seeing how it fits into their own understanding. They might quote it back to other people, but quoting it to someone else is different from accepting it.
    IEE 649 sx/sp cp

  11. #11
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    In case you haven't figured it out, my point is that you're taking what I said out of context.
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  12. #12
    escaping anndelise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    WA
    TIM
    IEE 649 sx/sp cp
    Posts
    6,338
    Mentioned
    210 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy
    In case you haven't figured it out, my point is that you're taking what I said out of context.
    it's an answer to your first post, not to your example. (which btw, i didn't understand)
    it's only being "taken out of context" because i'm saying that what you wrote in the first post can apply to types other than Te polrs
    IEE 649 sx/sp cp

  13. #13
    Kim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    TIM
    IEE e7 783 sx so
    Posts
    6,857
    Mentioned
    380 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy
    In case you haven't figured it out, my point is that you're taking what I said out of context.
    I actually think she has a point.

    You asked:

    Are IxFps reluctant to accept new information without understanding it's complexities and tying up any loose ends (other bits of information that don't fit in to their understanding of it all)?
    And your topic title strongly suggest that you are actually saying: "Does a Te PoLR mean that the respective person is reluctant to accept new information without understanding it's complexities and tying up any loose ends (other bits of information that don't fit in to their understanding of it all)"

    Ann's (and mine, actually) question is: "Wouldn't Te ego block people be the ones who are reluctant to accept new information that they don't quite understand and that don't fit into their framework? Aren't they the ones who keep asking for more information to understand the matter at hand and make sure that it's credible and valid information?"

    And I agree with Ann, I am very reluctant to accept that kind of new information. The person will need to make a case for its validity and credibility. That's valuing Te, in my mind.
    “Let us forget with generosity those who cannot love us”
    ― Pablo Neruda

  14. #14
    Exits, pursued by a bear. Animal's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    TIM
    It sneaks up on you
    Posts
    3,051
    Mentioned
    83 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: Is this a Te PoLR thing?

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy
    Are IxFps reluctant to accept new information without understanding it's complexities and tying up any loose ends (other bits of information that don't fit in to their understanding of it all)?
    Define "accept" here.

    Most intelligent people will be cautious when reacting to/making use of new information when they do not understand the system in its entirety in all its intricacies. How can one possibly truly "accept" information, without first making sure they understand it? That's ludicrous.

    I also did not understand your example. I can't make heads or tails out of something so garbled.

  15. #15
    Don't forget the the thehotelambush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    6,633
    Mentioned
    159 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Agree with Baby.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kim
    And I agree with Ann, I am very reluctant to accept that kind of new information. The person will need to make a case for its validity and credibility. That's valuing Te, in my mind.
    There are Te "cases" and then there are Ti "cases".

  16. #16
    Kim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    TIM
    IEE e7 783 sx so
    Posts
    6,857
    Mentioned
    380 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thehotelambush

    The way I see the Te PoLR in IFps is when they feel the need to act like a professional person and do lots of unnecessary work because they feel they are expected to. It has a plodding, slow quality to it, and I want to tell them to just cut to the chase and do only what is absolutely necessary.
    I think it's not in how they act, but how they react to Te information. They find it boring and tedious. The internal workings are of much greater importance and tend to be overvalued because it's not counteracted by Te. They are likely to either a) strictly stick to Ti, which makes them appear removed from reality (especially INFps) or b) get defensive when presented with Te and try to overcompensate by wanting the person to make the reasoning perfect, which is not possible because Te does not work that way. Or they just refuse and take everything back to Ti.

    When I have "intellectual" conversation with my INFp friend, it goes like this:

    INFp: Lacan says that all we do is chase objet-petit-a.
    ENFp: But how does that work in real life? Give me an example.
    INFp: Well, it's because life is all about fulfilling your desires.
    ENFp: Ok, but give me an example of objet-petit-a in your life. What's the point of all of this?
    INFp: Well, Žižek says that the real is impossible because it is impossible to imagine, impossible to integrate into the symbolic order.
    ENFp: Huh? What does that have to do with anything???
    INFp: The relationship whereby the ego is constituted by identification is a locus of "alienation", which is another feature of the imaginary, and is fundamentally narcissistic.

    ENFp dies of Ti overkill.

    He absolutely refuses to go outside of his Ti construct and I refuse to let it stand without being informed by Te or informing Te. Our conversations must be quite strange for onlookers...
    “Let us forget with generosity those who cannot love us”
    ― Pablo Neruda

  17. #17
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    "reluctant" means "more reluctant than other people who are given the same information in the same situation"

    say, assuming that something is a quality of a certain type because they believe people they know to be that type, and then using those examples as a response to what you're saying even if the premise of that typing has been challenged... in short, it looks like circular reasoning
    Here's a more specific example. Just use your imagination to insert a bunch of other conversation into the following example. What's written here is just the main points of this type of conversation.

    me: Perhaps that person is ISTj.
    IxFp: He's nothing like the ISTjs I know. The ISTjs I know are *insert qualities here* and aren't *insert other qualities here*
    me: Actually, that sounds more like a description of ESTjs.
    IxFp: No, this person is ISTj. He's just like another ISTj I know.
    me: ...and how do you know that the other person is ISTj?
    IxFp: He's *insert the aforementioned qualities here* and isn't *insert the other aforementioned qualities here*.
    me:
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  18. #18
    Kim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    TIM
    IEE e7 783 sx so
    Posts
    6,857
    Mentioned
    380 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thehotelambush
    Agree with Baby.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kim
    And I agree with Ann, I am very reluctant to accept that kind of new information. The person will need to make a case for its validity and credibility. That's valuing Te, in my mind.
    There are Te "cases" and then there are Ti "cases".
    I think credibility and validity are tied to Te. "Making sense," having an internal logic and being a working system in itself is Ti.
    “Let us forget with generosity those who cannot love us”
    ― Pablo Neruda

  19. #19
    Exits, pursued by a bear. Animal's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    TIM
    It sneaks up on you
    Posts
    3,051
    Mentioned
    83 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    This is important:

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy
    me: Perhaps that person is ISTj.
    IxFp: He's nothing like the ISTjs I know. The ISTjs I know are *insert qualities here* and aren't *insert other qualities here*
    me: Actually, that sounds more like a description of ESTjs [to me].
    IxFp: No, this person is ISTj. He's just like another ISTj I know.
    me: ...and how do you know that the other person is ISTj?
    IxFp: He's *insert the aforementioned qualities here* and isn't *insert the other aforementioned qualities here*.
    me:
    There is no possibility that you have confused ESTjs with ISTjs yourself?

  20. #20
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: Is this a Te PoLR thing?

    Quote Originally Posted by Baby
    Quote Originally Posted by Joy
    Are IxFps reluctant to accept new information without understanding it's complexities and tying up any loose ends (other bits of information that don't fit in to their understanding of it all)?
    Define "accept" here.
    Have you read any of the threads which discuss the Te bookshelves vs. Ti bookshelves?
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  21. #21
    Exits, pursued by a bear. Animal's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    TIM
    It sneaks up on you
    Posts
    3,051
    Mentioned
    83 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: Is this a Te PoLR thing?

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy
    Quote Originally Posted by Baby
    Quote Originally Posted by Joy
    Are IxFps reluctant to accept new information without understanding it's complexities and tying up any loose ends (other bits of information that don't fit in to their understanding of it all)?
    Define "accept" here.
    Have you read any of the threads which discuss the Te bookshelves vs. Ti bookshelves?
    Joy, do you intend to answer my question or not?

  22. #22
    escaping anndelise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    WA
    TIM
    IEE 649 sx/sp cp
    Posts
    6,338
    Mentioned
    210 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kim
    I think credibility and validity are tied to Te. "Making sense," having an internal logic and being a working system in itself is Ti.
    I can agree with this.
    as long as it's recognized that both would need some kind of understanding of what's being said in order to usefully accept it, and part of that understanding/accepting comes in when a person sees how it fits in with their own or others' experiences and/or understandings (imo, this is part of what makes it credible and valid as well as making sense"
    IEE 649 sx/sp cp

  23. #23
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Baby
    This is important:

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy
    me: Perhaps that person is ISTj.
    IxFp: He's nothing like the ISTjs I know. The ISTjs I know are *insert qualities here* and aren't *insert other qualities here*
    me: Actually, that sounds more like a description of ESTjs [to me].
    IxFp: No, this person is ISTj. He's just like another ISTj I know.
    me: ...and how do you know that the other person is ISTj?
    IxFp: He's *insert the aforementioned qualities here* and isn't *insert the other aforementioned qualities here*.
    me:
    There is no possibility that you have confused ESTjs with ISTjs yourself?
    Yeah, I used to have a disclaimer in my sig, and one of the things it addressed was essentially to assume that "imo" should be added to everything I say. Anyways...

    Whether or not I'm correct is irrelevant to this example.

    As for defining "accept", Ti "accept" is different from Te "accept" because Ti attaches new information to existing information in that person's structure of logic. For Te, "accept" doesn't mean *truly* accept on the same level as Ti. Te sees individual pieces of information and doesn't build on existing information the way Ti does. (Though of course, Te types have strong Ti as well, and vice versa.)
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  24. #24
    Logos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,406
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: Is this a Te PoLR thing?

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy
    Quote Originally Posted by Baby
    Quote Originally Posted by Joy
    Are IxFps reluctant to accept new information without understanding it's complexities and tying up any loose ends (other bits of information that don't fit in to their understanding of it all)?
    Define "accept" here.
    Have you read any of the threads which discuss the Te bookshelves vs. Ti bookshelves?
    Which even by Expat's own words were gross overgeneralizations of the point for the sake of simplifcation of ideas.
    "Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi
    Johari Box

  25. #25
    Exits, pursued by a bear. Animal's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    TIM
    It sneaks up on you
    Posts
    3,051
    Mentioned
    83 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy
    Whether or not I'm correct is irrelevant to this example.
    Actually I think it's quite relevant. Both and people (assuming that they are intelligent) will not accept something if it's wrong lol.

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy
    As for defining "accept", Ti "accept" is different from Te "accept" because Ti attaches new information to existing information in that person's structure of logic. For Te, "accept" doesn't mean *truly* accept on the same level as Ti. Te sees individual pieces of information and doesn't build on existing information the way Ti does. (Though of course, Te types have strong Ti as well, and vice versa.)
    Well, this would be irrelevant to your example if your assertion were wrong. Even a Te type could disagree with you on the same grounds that you quoted the IXFp using. It wouldn't necessarily reflect any functional implications. It would just mean that the assertion/information being profered is incorrect.

  26. #26
    Kim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    TIM
    IEE e7 783 sx so
    Posts
    6,857
    Mentioned
    380 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by anndelise
    Quote Originally Posted by Kim
    I think credibility and validity are tied to Te. "Making sense," having an internal logic and being a working system in itself is Ti.
    I can agree with this.
    as long as it's recognized that both would need some kind of understanding of what's being said in order to usefully accept it, and part of that understanding/accepting comes in when a person sees how it fits in with their own or others' experiences and/or understandings (imo, this is part of what makes it credible and valid as well as making sense"
    You really need both Ti and Te to fully and entirely understand it and integrate it. Even Te types don't necessarily want to integrate anything into their framework of knowledge that does not make sense internally. But that is not their primary concern - the reality check is more important.

    I can really see that in myself. I want to say: "who cares if it makes sense, does everything have to make sense???" in the initial stages of integrating something into my frame of reference and a Ti type wants to talk internal logic. I want to cover the Te aspects first, so I am asking where the info is coming from, what the system is based on, how it plays out in a practical sense, what its purpose is, etc. When that is covered it depends on the importance of this thing for my frame of reference. If I have to, I will go through the process of checking the "Ti soundness." If I don't have time or patience, I will say: "ooooh, why does everything have to make sense!" or "lemme call INTj friend xyz." I trust my Te judgment, but I like to discuss the internal structure with others just to be sure I have it sorted out correctly.

    So for Te PoLR, it would be the other way around. You never only use one or the other, but you neglect one to some degree.
    “Let us forget with generosity those who cannot love us”
    ― Pablo Neruda

  27. #27
    Don't forget the the thehotelambush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    6,633
    Mentioned
    159 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kim
    Quote Originally Posted by thehotelambush
    Agree with Baby.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kim
    And I agree with Ann, I am very reluctant to accept that kind of new information. The person will need to make a case for its validity and credibility. That's valuing Te, in my mind.
    There are Te "cases" and then there are Ti "cases".
    I think credibility and validity are tied to Te. "Making sense," having an internal logic and being a working system in itself is Ti.


    When I hear "valid" I naturally think of this definition:

    Quote Originally Posted by dictionary
    val·id /ˈvælɪd/ –adjective
    5. Logic. (of an argument) so constructed that if the premises are jointly asserted, the conclusion cannot be denied without contradiction.
    Anyway, "making sense" is definitely Ti.

  28. #28
    Kim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    TIM
    IEE e7 783 sx so
    Posts
    6,857
    Mentioned
    380 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Perhaps Te = what is the point vs. Ti = does it make sense? Roughly?
    “Let us forget with generosity those who cannot love us”
    ― Pablo Neruda

  29. #29
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Baby
    Quote Originally Posted by Joy
    Whether or not I'm correct is irrelevant to this example.
    Actually I think it's quite relevant. Both and people (assuming that they are intelligent) will not accept something if it's wrong lol.

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy
    As for defining "accept", Ti "accept" is different from Te "accept" because Ti attaches new information to existing information in that person's structure of logic. For Te, "accept" doesn't mean *truly* accept on the same level as Ti. Te sees individual pieces of information and doesn't build on existing information the way Ti does. (Though of course, Te types have strong Ti as well, and vice versa.)
    Well, this would be irrelevant to your example if your assertion were wrong. Even a Te type could disagree with you on the same grounds that you quoted the IXFp using. It wouldn't necessarily reflect any functional implications. It would just mean that the assertion is incorrect.
    It's not about whether or not they agree with me, it's about their reasoning for what they believe.
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  30. #30
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kim
    Perhaps Te = what is the point vs. Ti = does it make sense? Roughly?
    According to thehotelambush's definition of making sense, yes.
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  31. #31
    Kim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    TIM
    IEE e7 783 sx so
    Posts
    6,857
    Mentioned
    380 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thehotelambush
    Quote Originally Posted by Kim
    Quote Originally Posted by thehotelambush
    Agree with Baby.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kim
    And I agree with Ann, I am very reluctant to accept that kind of new information. The person will need to make a case for its validity and credibility. That's valuing Te, in my mind.
    There are Te "cases" and then there are Ti "cases".
    I think credibility and validity are tied to Te. "Making sense," having an internal logic and being a working system in itself is Ti.


    When I hear "valid" I naturally think of this definition:

    Quote Originally Posted by dictionary
    val·id /ˈvælɪd/ –adjective
    5. Logic. (of an argument) so constructed that if the premises are jointly asserted, the conclusion cannot be denied without contradiction.

    Anyway, "making sense" is definitely Ti.


    It's just so telling, isn't it? :wink:
    “Let us forget with generosity those who cannot love us”
    ― Pablo Neruda

  32. #32
    Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    10,853
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Baby
    Quote Originally Posted by Joy
    Whether or not I'm correct is irrelevant to this example.
    Actually I think it's quite relevant. Both and people (assuming that they are intelligent) will not accept something if it's wrong lol.
    No, I agree with Joy. Regardless of who is right about it being ISTj or ESTj, the point is that the "IxFp" is caught in a logical loop. If you replace the phrase "that sounds more like an ESTj" with "are you sure ISTjs are like that?" the point is still made and it has nothing to do about "Joy" in that dialogue being right or wrong about ESTjs or ISTjs.
    , LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
    Quote Originally Posted by implied
    gah you're like the shittiest ENTj ever!

  33. #33
    Logos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,406
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kim
    Perhaps Te = what is the point vs. Ti = does it make sense? Roughly?
    Te: If the facts () are correct, then the structural integrity of the system () will follow.

    Ti: If the structure of the system () is sound, then the correct facts () should follow.
    "Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi
    Johari Box

  34. #34
    Logos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,406
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Expat
    Quote Originally Posted by Baby
    Quote Originally Posted by Joy
    Whether or not I'm correct is irrelevant to this example.
    Actually I think it's quite relevant. Both and people (assuming that they are intelligent) will not accept something if it's wrong lol.
    No, I agree with Joy. Regardless of who is right about it being ISTj or ESTj, the point is that the "IxFp" is caught in a logical loop. If you replace the phrase "that sounds more like an ESTj" with "are you sure ISTjs are like that?" the point is still made and it has nothing to do about "Joy" in that dialogue being right or wrong about ESTjs or ISTjs.
    And how is that argumentative loop any different from the one Joy is using in that same dialogue?
    "Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi
    Johari Box

  35. #35
    Exits, pursued by a bear. Animal's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    TIM
    It sneaks up on you
    Posts
    3,051
    Mentioned
    83 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Logos
    Quote Originally Posted by Expat
    Quote Originally Posted by Baby
    Quote Originally Posted by Joy
    Whether or not I'm correct is irrelevant to this example.
    Actually I think it's quite relevant. Both and people (assuming that they are intelligent) will not accept something if it's wrong lol.
    No, I agree with Joy. Regardless of who is right about it being ISTj or ESTj, the point is that the "IxFp" is caught in a logical loop. If you replace the phrase "that sounds more like an ESTj" with "are you sure ISTjs are like that?" the point is still made and it has nothing to do about "Joy" in that dialogue being right or wrong about ESTjs or ISTjs.
    And how is that argumentative loop any different from the one Joy is using in that same dialogue?
    Exactly.

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy
    It's not about whether or not they agree with me, it's about their reasoning for what they believe.
    It's also about your reasoning for what you believe. There are two circular arguments here:

    IXFp: ISTjs I know display traits XYZ -> this person displays XYZ traits as well -> therefore, this person must be ISTj
    Joy: traits XYZ are displayed by ESTjs -> this person displays traits XYZ -> therefore, this person must be ESTj, not ISTj as IXFp is saying

    Why should the IXFp have to "accept" the "information" Joy is presenting, and not vice cersa? They both stem from the same exact brand of premise.

  36. #36
    Kim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    TIM
    IEE e7 783 sx so
    Posts
    6,857
    Mentioned
    380 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Expat
    Quote Originally Posted by Baby
    Quote Originally Posted by Joy
    Whether or not I'm correct is irrelevant to this example.
    Actually I think it's quite relevant. Both and people (assuming that they are intelligent) will not accept something if it's wrong lol.
    No, I agree with Joy. Regardless of who is right about it being ISTj or ESTj, the point is that the "IxFp" is caught in a logical loop. If you replace the phrase "that sounds more like an ESTj" with "are you sure ISTjs are like that?" the point is still made and it has nothing to do about "Joy" in that dialogue being right or wrong about ESTjs or ISTjs.
    If you can replace these phrases, you could also make it read:

    a. He sounds like an ISTj because of these characteristics.
    b. Those sound more ESTj.
    c. No, they are what makes him ISTj.
    d. But no, those are the characteristics of an ESTj.

    The circular reasoning works on both ends, only that the IxFp specifies how she knows about the characteristics (personal observation). If the IxFp had asked Joy what makes this person ESTj, she would have had to say the characteristic listed make him/her ESTj. Then ISFp asks why and Joy says because these are ESTj characteristics. Same line of reasoning, at least as it is implied in this excerpt. So I think Baby is right.

    Wouldn't a Te-type ask: "But what makes you so sure that these characteristic are ISTj characteristic because I think they are not"?
    “Let us forget with generosity those who cannot love us”
    ― Pablo Neruda

  37. #37
    Kim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    TIM
    IEE e7 783 sx so
    Posts
    6,857
    Mentioned
    380 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Logos
    Quote Originally Posted by Kim
    Perhaps Te = what is the point vs. Ti = does it make sense? Roughly?
    Te: If the facts () are correct, then the structural integrity of the system () will follow.

    Ti: If the structure of the system () is sound, then the correct facts () should follow.
    Yes that works and fully illustrates my Ti PoLR because I don't think the Ti example works. But that only shows that it probably does. If you know what I mean.
    “Let us forget with generosity those who cannot love us”
    ― Pablo Neruda

  38. #38
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I left out the stuff about me because it's irrelevant to the example. If I wanted to include irrelevant information I wouldn't have used phrases like *insert qualities here* and whatnot.

    btw... I want to make sure that everyone understands that I'm not attempting to define a Te PoLR in its entirety here.
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  39. #39
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Baby
    Quote Originally Posted by Logos
    Quote Originally Posted by Expat
    Quote Originally Posted by Baby
    Quote Originally Posted by Joy
    Whether or not I'm correct is irrelevant to this example.
    Actually I think it's quite relevant. Both and people (assuming that they are intelligent) will not accept something if it's wrong lol.
    No, I agree with Joy. Regardless of who is right about it being ISTj or ESTj, the point is that the "IxFp" is caught in a logical loop. If you replace the phrase "that sounds more like an ESTj" with "are you sure ISTjs are like that?" the point is still made and it has nothing to do about "Joy" in that dialogue being right or wrong about ESTjs or ISTjs.
    And how is that argumentative loop any different from the one Joy is using in that same dialogue?
    Exactly.

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy
    It's not about whether or not they agree with me, it's about their reasoning for what they believe.
    It's also about your reasoning for what you believe. There are two circular arguments here:

    IXFp: ISTjs I know display traits XYZ -> this person displays XYZ traits as well -> therefore, this person must be ISTj
    Joy: traits XYZ are displayed by ESTjs -> this person displays traits XYZ -> therefore, this person must be ESTj, not ISTj as IXFp is saying

    Why should the IXFp have to "accept" the "information" Joy is presenting, and not vice cersa? They both stem from the same exact brand of premise.
    First of all, that's not what I was saying in the example. Secondly, the IxFp shouldn't accept anything I've said, just discuss the subject without repeatedly returning to a premise that has been challenged.
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  40. #40
    Exits, pursued by a bear. Animal's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    TIM
    It sneaks up on you
    Posts
    3,051
    Mentioned
    83 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The IXFp actually was challenging your premise to which your response was (and I quote):

    So, you're basically telling me that in order to have a conversation with you, someone must "discuss the subject without repeatedly returning to a premise that has been challenged" when you refuse to do the same?

Page 1 of 13 1234511 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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