and, so, etc

[dbmmama]

starting a sentence with so or with and, is that Ti? and if that is so, what placement would the Ti be in for a person that does that a lot? i notice i do it in almost every post. and irl too, but more in my writing. (there it is again, i didn't do it on purpose )

[Markuz]

I do that a lot, but only when i'm asking a question about something, which accounts for about 40% of everything I say in a day.

[dbmmama]

I do that a lot, but only when i'm asking a question about something, which accounts for about 40% of everything I say in a day.

yes, those are the times irl i do it too. i'm either asking my kids questions to get them to think or answering theirs and explaining something. those things take up a big majority of what i say irl in a day.

[dbmmama]

Grammatical correctness or preciseness could be attributed to Ti.

wow, really? for many years i have been a stickler for those things. only since being with my hubby for so many years and he is a dr.seussical speaking fella, has my grammar and such fallen by the wayside. he and i noticed and commented on that just a few weeks ago.

i correct my kids on a few major ones that bug the shit out of me that they do and say. the whole "john and me" vs. "john and i" oh that one gets me! and those little buggers do it on purpose to see me get riled up. lol after a while, i finally realized they knew the correct way but were doing it on purpose to bug me. so, now we laugh about it. but i still want them to say it correctly. LOL!!

[dbmmama]

Haha. Yeah, my Mum does that as well (corrects us when we say "John and me"). She's not a Ti type though.

I do think that she is an ISFj (at least an introvert, rational type anyway). Perhaps obsession for perfect grammer is something that could be attributed to the rationals in general? (I don't know.)

Then again, if you're a SEE afterall, that blows that theory out of the window.

well, like i said, it's only on a couple of grammatical rules. that one just gets me for some reason. and i'm not this over the top rude correction officer on it or something. my mil was like that. a retired schoolteacher.......very strict with those kinds of things.

[Phaedrus]

Grammatical correctness or preciseness could be attributed to Ti.

But it is not.

[cracka]

I picked up SO when I moved to Oregon.

I noticed it when the guy who visited Tennessee for my interview. I remember saying, you start out sentences with So a lot... he laughed and I just let it go. Then I moved here... and now I do it ALL THE TIME.

Related to a function... not in my case... just related to where I live.

[munenori2]

starting a sentence with so or with and, is that Ti? and if that is so, what placement would the Ti be in for a person that does that a lot? i notice i do it in almost every post. and irl too, but more in my writing. (there it is again, i didn't do it on purpose )

I do that all the time, dbmmama. Not quite sure what that is, but I pretty much throw grammar out the window if the rest makes sense to me and other people. Of course, that stuff was what always lost me points in my college essays. Which was nice.

[Phaedrus]

Do you attribute grammatical correctness to any socionics-related entity?

That's very questionable. At least it is not attributable to any single function.

[dbmmama]

From socionics.us:


Isn't that what grammatical structure is? A system of rules and categories? We utilize logical judgments to arrange words according to the rules?

i sure think so. grammar was one of my favorite subjects as a kid. the rules were very satisfying and made me feel secure. i was NOT a literature kid, but i loved making those sentence outlines. i'm also a pretty good natural speller. years ago, i would have never allowed myself to type the way i do today. it would have been capitals in their correct place and typos fixed right away....

[Phaedrus]

From socionics.us:

Isn't that what grammatical structure is? A system of rules and categories? We utilize logical judgments to arrange words according to the rules?

That description of is one of the most misunderstood of all functions descriptions in Socionics.

[dbmmama]

That description of is one of the most misunderstood of all functions descriptions in Socionics.

maybe because you don't value it? but it's not that misunderstood by people who value it.

[marooned]

I don't know how much this is related...

Fwiw, I hate spelling and grammar. (because it does not come easily to me... and I felt grammar exercises in elementary school were a waste of time... thank god spell check and the internet came along later)

I always pegged it to left brain (language center - thinks in words) vs. right brain (visual - thinks in images).

[Phaedrus]

What is the correct understanding of Ti then?

A correct understanding of Ti is to be found in Jung's Psychological Types, where he explains the main differences between Ti and Te. Those aspects are the most important to focus on if you want to know what Ti is and what it is not. The essence of Ti is captured by this quote from Wikipedia:

…there exists today the beginning of a science which claims to possess a systematic method for such a clarification in meaning, and that is the phenomenology founded by Husserl. Here clarification of meaning consists in focussing more sharply on the concepts concerned by directing our attention in a certain way, namely, onto our own acts in the use of these concepts, onto our powers in carrying out our acts, etc.

Also, anyone who is interested in getting a correct understanding of the true nature of Ti as it typically manifests itself in the behaviour and attitudes of a person with leading Ti (an INTj) should take a close look at the videos in which Jung is interviewed:

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ad.php?t=19759

[Phaedrus]

I agree with Rick's. But especially in Ti-creatives, "the rules" mastered may not as much be notational as they are structural.

Rick DeLong does not understand Ti correctly. That's a sad fact of nature.

[redbaron]

I don't know how much this is related...

Fwiw, I hate spelling and grammar. (because it does not come easily to me... and I felt grammar exercises in elementary school were a waste of time... thank god spell check and the internet came along later)

I always pegged it to left brain (language center - thinks in words) vs. right brain (visual - thinks in images).

well write this down in the history books. I think this is the first time I've disagreed with anything you've said, Loki, LOL! I loved grammer and speling all my life long.

[marooned]

well write this down in the history books. I think this is the first time I've disagreed with anything you've said, Loki, LOL! I loved grammer and speling all my life long.

ha! I often find myself agreeing with your posts as well.

[Phaedrus]

How about these?

Introverted thinking is contemplative, involving an inner play of ideas. It is thinking for its own sake and is always directed inward to subjective ideas and personal convictions rather than outward to practical outcomes. The main concern of such thinking is to elaborate as fully as possible all the ramifications and implications of a seminal idea. As a consequence, introverted thinking can be complex, turgid and overly scrupulous.

This is from Jung, and it describes the same thing as in the quote from Wikipedia about phenomenology. The essence of this is that Ti is about subjective ideas. It is extremely important to understand that is subjective and is objective. Those two functions are subjective and objective in the same sense as the one described in Reinin's dichotomy -- and that is also the exact same sense Jung is talking about Ti and Te.

Extraverted thinking is driven by the objective evidence of the senses or by objective (collective) ideas that derive from tradition or learning. Its purpose is to abstract conceptual relationships from objective experience, linking ideas together in a rational, logical fashion. Furthermore, any conclusions that are drawn are always directed outward to some objective product or practical outcome. Thinking is never carried out for its own sake, merely as some private, subjective enterprise.

This is also from Jung. Notice that it fits Reinin's Subjective/Objective dichotomy perfectly.

[Elro]

I picked up SO when I moved to Oregon.

I noticed it when the guy who visited Tennessee for my interview. I remember saying, you start out sentences with So a lot... he laughed and I just let it go. Then I moved here... and now I do it ALL THE TIME.

Related to a function... not in my case... just related to where I live.

Yeah, I think manners of speaking are contagious. Particularly when you're around the same people a lot.

[FDG]

My first instinct would probably connect it to ethics as a role function, which is often said to use polite introductory sentences in order to start the more "logical" part of the dialogue.