Ti/Te PoLR

[Default]

How would you describe Ti and Te PoLR?

[silverchris9]

Theoretical:

This is a bit of an experiment, but I would describe it primarily in terms of internal and external.

Ti-polrs want all of their thinking externalized: they need facts, concrete, step-by-step explanations of what to do, lists of all the parts (objects), etc. How a system breaks down into its discrete component parts. If they don't get this, they don't really know how to do objective analysis. So if it's something that requires thorough understanding of a system, they have trouble with it.

Te-polrs want all of their thinking internalized: they need abstract systems to explore, "neatness" of logic, clear explanations of how one thing relates to another (fields), etc. How discrete pieces of information fits into an overarching system. If they don't get this, they don't really know how to do objective analysis. So if it's something that requires dealing with "just the facts," they have trouble with it.


Practical:

Te-polrs hate having to do anything that they consider boring or dry or too factual. If you put a bunch of unorganized data in front of them, they will have to organize that data into a system in order to be able to do anything with it at all.

Ti-polrs hate having to do anything that they consider too abstract and theoretical/rigid. If you give them a big, abstract system but refuse to explain to them how the step-by-step process works, it annoys them. They need to know the individual facts, or an explanation of what they literally have to do, what the procedure is, etc.

[Mediator Kam]

Te PoLR: Never wanting to be considered wrong. For me, it is factual correctness to the point that you can't stand being incorrect or being proven wrong. On many occasions, I have found myself getting pissed whenever I am criticized at all.

What silverchris said is something I support.

[silverchris9]

Oh, that's a good point.

Because they're not good at these things, and have been painfully criticized for them in the past, Te-polrs can very sensitive about being corrected on factual errors, when someone points out that they made a factual mistake in an argument. It even comes down to knowing terms for things. I get really uncomfortable if I misuse terminology, but I still do it rather a lot. Ti-polrs can be very sensitive about someone pointing out failures in their logic, saying something illogical, etc. This is especially true of people who grew up in environments that emphasized weak functions.

With the polr, you either over-emphasize it or under-emphasize it, so some SEIs and IEIs may be super-obsessive about getting their facts right and super uncomfortable when someone points out that they got a fact wrong. Some SEEs and IEEs may be obsessive about making sure everything they say makes perfect sense and follows all of the abstract rules (grammatical, logical, etc.).

Thanks, kamajama.

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[Default]

Practical:

Te-polrs hate having to do anything that they consider boring or dry or too factual. If you put a bunch of unorganized data in front of them, they will have to organize that data into a system in order to be able to do anything with it at all.

Ti-polrs hate having to do anything that they consider too abstract and theoretical/rigid. If you give them a big, abstract system but refuse to explain to them how the step-by-step process works, it annoys them. They need to know the individual facts, or an explanation of what they literally have to do, what the procedure is, etc.

I'm curious to know, what is your opinion on information elements?
Do you believe certain bits of information to belong to a particular IM, like empirical data for Te and systems of logic for Ti, or that bits of information are subject to different perceptions based on the priorities of ones IMs and type (I can't think of an example since I'm anything but an expert at this)?
To clarify, information elements basically convey the way we process information, am I correct? I just need input since I've read a lot of generalizations equating certain actions to Fi, or Fe, etc etc

It would also help if you could somehow give me a tangible example of how these elements and their blockings come to life.

Well... if you disagree, Pinocchio, why not give your input on how you define them?

[Mediator Kam]

I'm sorry but that doesn't seem Te PoLR, but Ti.
Te PoLR don't care about telling them that they're incorrect, as long as you live them alone and that doesn't menace their future (obligations, for example).

Kama, you're wrong once more . But don't worry, I'm a Ti type, so this means that this incident will not be invoked by me again in the future, that's why Fe get along well with Ti types, right?

If someone is telling me that my facts are wrong, they are NOT leaving me alone. Therefore, I feel that they are smarter than me or that they now think less of me now that they have proven me wrong. That is one of the most hated feelings for me, to be proven wrong, unequivocally, no way to regain respect, it's all over. Yes, I value the way people see me. That is not evidence of Fi ego. I feel that I am looked down on when someone proves me wrong. Maybe part of it was always being called smart and having all the answers when someone would ask me something? And therefore when I am not just wrong, but someone is challenging my assertions or assumptions, I become very edgy and angry.

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[Aiss]

Practical:

Te-polrs hate having to do anything that they consider boring or dry or too factual. If you put a bunch of unorganized data in front of them, they will have to have that data organized into a system in order to be able to do anything with it at all.

Ti-polrs hate having to do anything that they consider too abstract and theoretical/rigid. If you give them a big, abstract system but refuse to explain to them how the step-by-step process works, it annoys them. They need to be given all the facts, or an explanation of what they literally have to do, what the procedure is, etc.

Fixed for my observations.

I realize it basically means the only way to get through to Te-PoLR is with Ti, and vice versa. This has been my experience with these types so far.

[Rubicon]

Te PoLR/Ti HA in terms of myself: Being frustrated when having to deal with a bunch of information that can't be easily ignored in favour of remembering a general concept. Feeling burdened by excessive/random information - compulsively organising it, or dismissing it all in frustration. Making possibly odd connections between things for the sake of simplification. Embracing stereotypes. Being annoyed at people who think they're too special to be stereotyped. :-p Rising so far above semantical semantics that I lose touch with reality. Finding a "point" to someone's ramblings when there may not have been one. Feeling like I'm flying blind when I'm given step-by-step instructions on how to do something as opposed to just being given an idea of the end result that's wanted. Being embarrassed at not knowing information that I should know. Understanding a concept, but finding it hard to explain it to others succinctly. Lazy thinking - not thinking through a concept until I start talking or writing. Preferring to show someone how to do something/do it myself rather than explain how to.

[silverchris9]

I'm curious to know, what is your opinion on information elements?
Do you believe certain bits of information to belong to a particular IM, like empirical data for Te and systems of logic for Ti, or that bits of information are subject to different perceptions based on the priorities of ones IMs and type (I can't think of an example since I'm anything but an expert at this)?
To clarify, information elements basically convey the way we process information, am I correct? I just need input since I've read a lot of generalizations equating certain actions to Fi, or Fe, etc etc

It would also help if you could somehow give me a tangible example of how these elements and their blockings come to life.

Hmmm... this is tough question, I think.

Simple answer: No, certain bits of information do not belong exclusively to a particular IM. Yes, IMs are more about how we process information than what information we process.

Complicated(-ass) Answer: Certain ways of looking at data are type related. It's not by any means as though the ability to use formal logic is restricted to LIIs and ILEs. That wouldn't even make sense. But people do like to relate to information in certain ways. This by no means universally accepted socionics, but here's my current view on the matter: Sensing, Intuition, Feeling/Ethics, and Thinking all apply to literally different discrete pieces of information. However, the introverted or extroverted varieties thereof (Fe and Fi; Te and Ti; Se and Si; Ne and Ni) apply to the same information with different emphases. That is, Ne and Ni both apply to information perceived by mental abstraction (whether this is mental abstraction from sense perception or something more "spiritual" in nature is an interesting question, but not central to this discussion), but they involve processing it, and especially relating it to others in ways with different emphases. This, to me, is fundamental to socionics, and it's a big part of why the socionics function ordering is different from the MBTI function ordering (if you know MBTI): part of what we're describing when we say that an IEI has Ni and Fe in his ego and Ne and Fi in his id is that an IEI is most comfortable with information about intuition and feeling, and prefers to emphasize the introverted aspects of intuition and the extroverted aspects of feeling. I know that's all very philosophical and abstract and sort of unclear, and I apologize, but that's about as close as I can get to really articulating my take on the matter.

Now, for some more concrete examples of what I mean by the above:

Say you look at a ball. Obviously every type is going to register information about that ball. But an S is going to register more detailed information more quickly than another type, and an Se type is going to be more inclined to trust that extra information and find it really important and valuable. An Si ego probably isn't going to care so much about registering all the information about the ball (that is, about the ball, by itself, independent of how it affects them), although they can totally pick up all the information the Se ego did.

Say you're getting a massage. Obviously, no matter your type, you feel good, right? But S egos are going to register more detailed information about how the massage makes them feel. Even an IEE or ILE, who will feel super good and super relaxed and really grateful to someone for taking care of them physically, will register less detailed information; they will just know it feels really good. An Si ego is going to subconsciously store that information and remember it and focus on it and how they can reproduce the same positive physical sensations, etc. An Se ego will notice the same information, but not really care.

I could go on, but I think that's enough to make the point. Everyone has some minimal facility with each of the IMs, obviously. But everyone also has a) some that they are able to use more thoroughly/better (in the manner described), and b) a preference as to whether they prefer more extroverted or more introverted versions of a given dichotomy (Thinking, Feeling, Sensing, Intuition).

Now, how Ti and Te polr manifest themselves

SEI: Read what Rubicon wrote. I don't really know what SEIs in general are like/how they manifest Te-polr, but everything he said makes 100% sense to me.

IEI: I make lots of little factual errors, don't focus on the little details unless absolutely forced to. I don't care about doing things "the best way" unless it's something I really care about. If it's something I really care about, I will slave over it (not Te-polr related, just explaining), and be meticulous and obsessive and perfectionist. If it's something I don't care about, I will literally do a way that takes longer and wastes time and doesn't do the job as well just for the sake of not having to focus on it. I am *so* indifferent to "optimization" (that's a Te buzzword).

SEE: I know lots of SEEs. They get annoyed if you correct their logic a lot. They'll say things about how they don't care that much about logic, they care about results; they're more interesting in getting it done than saying all the logical things and following all the logical systems people create. They get annoyed if you over-analyze things in a very Ti way. For example, my little brother gets pissed when I over-analyze music, pulling apart how the verse relates to the chorus, and how the piano part overpowers the drums, etc.

IEE: IEEs are uncomfortable with rigid systems that don't allow room for change and individual expression and stuff. IEEs hate it when you make absolute rules about things are (statics of fields), but are perfectly fine with general "how we do things here" procedures (dynamics of objects), as long as they are flexible, and will get pissed at people/organizations who don't have good disorganized or, in my (IEE) mother's words, "messy." For an IEE, a good rule is one that can be broken, unless it's an absolute ethical imperative, you know, like, don't flip your grandma the bird or something.

Does that help? Let me know if I'm not answering your real questions/writing in a way that's helpful to you.

Feeling like I'm flying blind when I'm given step-by-step instructions on how to do something as opposed to just being given an idea of the end result that's wanted. Being embarrassed at not knowing information that I should know. Understanding a concept, but finding it hard to explain it to others succinctly. Lazy thinking - not thinking through a concept until I start talking or writing.

Yes. +1000.

[Rubicon]

..but everything she said makes 100% sense to me.

Fixed.

[silverchris9]

Fixed.

hehe. Sorry. I think I tend to assume that people are the same gender as their avatar, no matter whether or not I know that the avatar isn't them.

[Lobo]

It's funny how polrs work. I read this thread and I think this is a silly thing to be stressing about . I've never looked down on somebody who got an information wrong or something like that.

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[Mediator Kam]

And that's Fi. You think "he told me I'm wrong, now what?". Now nothing man, this is what Te/Fi types find hard to accept.

Wrong. Fi ego would appreciate Te correcting them. I never want to be corrected. I want to figure everything out myself. Unhealthy, sure.

[mikemex]

Ti PoLR is mostly about focusing in the way you understand things (how they are connected through Fi) rather than what things actually are. Ti PoLRs often get pissed off when they are pointed out that their long descriptions about something actually have a short, single word name.

Symbolic understanding of things is mostly a Ti thing. Ti PoLRs, being weak at describing things using symbols, usually try to give as much information as possible without any kind of associated structure. This confuses Ti types (specially Ti dominants) because they are not used to deal with raw data. Ti PoLRs often feel symbols are too restricting and that they don't convey all the details. This is often true, though not to the extent the Ti PoLR thinks.

A real life example would be a SEE girl I know. She sleeps with many men, mostly to get material things such as money, cars, etc. The definition of a woman who exchanges sex for commercial gain is a prostitute. However, she wrongly believes that her circumstances make her something else, but not a prostitute. That negation of a general category and stubbornness to insist that minor details make up for a qualitative change is the manifestation of the Ti PoLR.

[stanprollyright]

With the polr, you either over-emphasize it or under-emphasize it, so some SEIs and IEIs may be super-obsessive about getting their facts right and super uncomfortable when someone points out that they got a fact wrong. Some SEEs and IEEs may be obsessive about making sure everything they say makes perfect sense and follows all of the abstract rules (grammatical, logical, etc.).

I'm one of the over-emphasizers.

Ti PoLR: When telling a story or giving a rationale, I go overboard on the details and facts because I don't know what is essential for understanding the story. When given a multi-stepped task, logical assumptions frustrate me, as I have to memorize each step in order because I can't figure them out on my own. I often come up with logical answers via mental trial and error (Ne). I'm really good at understanding big pictures and concepts, but I find it incredibly difficult to explain this understanding in a comprehensible manner. Once I come to some sort of logical conclusion I usually make it into some sort of general rule that I can memorize and apply. I generally try to use good grammar and spelling always, even in texts. I get irritated when people accuse me of being inconsistent or operating contrary to logic.

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[krieger]

Phaedrus corrected people all the time, yet you call him Ti-PoLR.

OOPS. Back to the drawing board.

[Beautiful sky]

Phaedrus corrected people all the time, yet you call him Ti-PoLR.

OOPS. Back to the drawing board.

He's INTj. I am INFj and I tend to do that in writing, like on this forum because people are less a subject then in real life. In real life, I would not correct people but just be there and listen. In writing, my inner supressed thoughts that may provoke certain emotional responses that would occure in real contact come out and allow me to be more open and expressive with my opinions.

[krieger]

Tell all that to Pinocchio.

Phaedrus doesn't like being called INTj, by the way. From his point of view that typing made no sense. You two could have a lot of fun and pointless discussions together.

[Beautiful sky]

Tell all that to Pinocchio.

Phaedrus doesn't like being called INTj, by the way. From his point of view that typing made no sense. You two could have a lot of fun and pointless discussions together.

We would, but he's not around.

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[krieger]

I wrote an illegitimate haiku about this thread because I don't give a shit and don't want to look up the right number of words and lines:

Pinocchio
strange awkward geeky man
calls kama and pheadrus identical
I stop reading

[Wynch]

5
7
5
Syllables

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[Beautiful sky]

All his supposed "Ti resoluteness" is a Ti-PoLR reaction. Maritsa, for example, behaves the same way, but I assume no one has a doubt she's a Delta NF.

The difference is that I would never call human beings half the things he did.

[Azeroffs]

Te-PoLR have trouble dealing with things in a detached and rational manner. They have trouble focusing on work and tend to have trouble doing things the way things are "supposed" to be done, often doing things in a way that is most emotionally stimulating which can be perceived as wasteful of time or resources. They fear that they won't meet objective expectations or that they will be forced to do so.

Ti-PoLR have trouble constricting themselves according to objective guidelines or ideologies. Rules of any kind are very limiting and constraining. Strict adherence to anything that they don't feel strongly about is painful, and they fear being stuck in these situations.

my 2 cents

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[Galen]

but I assume no one has a doubt she's a Delta NF.

And how long have you been on this website?


As for Ti PoLR, to me it feels like a lack of desire for active examination about the world. I tend to get very uncomfortable when I am asked to defend my actions or opinions in a logical sense, because I never know how to answer. I can't really explain why it makes me so uncomfortable, but it does. It's almost like Ti tries to pick apart and rearrange all the inner subjective things about me without any regard or acceptance as to who I am or what I stand for. It reminds me of this Niels Bohr quote: "You're not thinking, you're just being logical." Ti is a very circuitous and unnecessary thing to be, because it tests and pokes at everything around something or the action that was taken, but not the thing or action itself. Sorry if this is incredibly vague, but I don't know how else to phrase it; if I figure something else out I'll respond again.

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[silverchris9]

I'd add that having an established timeline and milestones horrifies Te-PoLRs. It's an adherence to a dynamic system, in contrast to the static one in case of Ti-PoLR.

AH! You have stumbled over something completely accurate and profound. That said, I have to say, your approach in general is edging towards Maritsaism (that's a thing now, I made the word, so it's a thing now), insofar as you tend to associate specific traits with types. This is fine, so long as you don't make the mistake of assuming that one specific trait can make or unmake a typing. That's how people with perfectly fine theoretical understanding (Maritsa really doesn't have that bad of a grasp of the fundamentals of the theory) end up grossly mistyping multiple people. Just thought I'd say that.

Now, that said, 100% agreed on that bit. There are probably some IEIs out there that have learned to work with established timelines. But I just don't like my extroverted judging objective and firm. I like my extroverted judging loosey and bendable and abstract Fe-y.

[Galen]

If I'd see the point of your question or where my answer would be relevant, I'd answer you.

The point is that there are many people on this website who do not believe that Maritsa is Delta NF.

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[Creepy-male]

I'd add that having an established timeline and milestones horrifies Te-PoLRs. It's an adherence to a dynamic system, in contrast to the static one in case of Ti-PoLR.

This. Even though you think I'm Te Role rather than PoLR.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

A real life example would be a SEE girl I know. She sleeps with many men, mostly to get material things such as money, cars, etc. The definition of a woman who exchanges sex for commercial gain is a prostitute. However, she wrongly believes that her circumstances make her something else, but not a prostitute. That negation of a general category and stubbornness to insist that minor details make up for a qualitative change is the manifestation of the Ti PoLR.

Are you really this dense Mikemex? She's just upset because she knows what she's doing, but she wants to be seen as more than how she chooses to make a living, which by the way- is probably none of your business. You're like reading into things and making all these criticisms/insights/judgements about her, but really she just wants to be seen as a WHOLE person, she's already aware that she's a prostitute.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

Hmm Arctures interesting. Yeah, I'd rather be logical and right about reality as it is now, then come up with any true 'original thought.' In fact my brain doesn't really work that way. I'm creative in the sense I can connect ideas and different shit together with my Ni, but I'm not really like, I don't do the Ashton or you thing and say all these original pure mental quotes about shit. I suppose I just don't categorize information in that way.

[Default]

Complicated(-ass) Answer: Certain ways of looking at data are type related. It's not by any means as though the ability to use formal logic is restricted to LIIs and ILEs. That wouldn't even make sense. But people do like to relate to information in certain ways. This by no means universally accepted socionics, but here's my current view on the matter: Sensing, Intuition, Feeling/Ethics, and Thinking all apply to literally different discrete pieces of information. However, the introverted or extroverted varieties thereof (Fe and Fi; Te and Ti; Se and Si; Ne and Ni) apply to the same information with different emphases. That is, Ne and Ni both apply to information perceived by mental abstraction (whether this is mental abstraction from sense perception or something more "spiritual" in nature is an interesting question, but not central to this discussion), but they involve processing it, and especially relating it to others in ways with different emphases. This, to me, is fundamental to socionics, and it's a big part of why the socionics function ordering is different from the MBTI function ordering (if you know MBTI): part of what we're describing when we say that an IEI has Ni and Fe in his ego and Ne and Fi in his id is that an IEI is most comfortable with information about intuition and feeling, and prefers to emphasize the introverted aspects of intuition and the extroverted aspects of feeling. I know that's all very philosophical and abstract and sort of unclear, and I apologize, but that's about as close as I can get to really articulating my take on the matter.

So, to you, 1) T/S/F/N represents different bits of information, and 2) How one would interpret this information depends on the polarity of their introverted/extroverted preferences? Isn't that a given, though, that they would be different information? This is the one thing I don't comprehend completely, from what you wrote. As in, what you were trying to convey from the first part? The second part makes sense.

I'm not familiar with MBTI, since it seems to be a rather isolated system which only relates to you and not your interactions with other people. I don't see much use in it, although it might be useful for self-discovery.

The middle ground seems to be the most reasonable answer... Of course, different abilities, personalities and interests aren't exclusive to any single type, but it would suffice to say that certain types are more predisposed to some behaviors.
Not that that really answers anything, though, which makes socionics a rather intuitive system which requires one to capture its essence, especially since there are exceptions in discerning one's type (which some attribute to subtypes?).

Most of the replies tie PoLRs to corresponding function blockings, which would be natural since it affects the blocking of other elements. This leads me to ask...
How is PoLR tied to creative?

Sorry if I sound rather ignorant, I'm still learning.

[Galen]

What do they believe?

Things other than delta NF. The point is that the statement "no one has a doubt of her being Delta NF" is incorrect. That's all.