Examples of Te dual seeking

[Aiss]

*watches FDG and Azeroff kick Ashton out of our quadra*



To be serious, though, I realize Te-dominant is different from Te-creative as far as phenotype goes, but I would like to point out Te itself isn't sticking to procedures, nor an assumption of there being one and only one "right" way. I don't know where this misconception comes from, but you might want to look around and question it rather than mindlessly repeat the stereotype, even if it does wonders for your egos. Just a suggestion.

[Cuddly McFluffles]

*watches FDG and Azeroff kick Ashton out of our quadra*

I thought you were considering LII.

*samples her popcorn*

[ashlesha]

Strange, usually it's the exact opposite for me. People can choose whatever goals they want, and I usually tell them what they should do based on that. It seems presumptuous to think that you can tell someone what their goals should be, but that's just me.

[Aiss]

I thought you were considering LII.

*samples her popcorn*

damn, I forgot about that ._.

oh and you can have the popcorn, I don't like this stuff anyway. wish they had something taster on here.

[Cuddly McFluffles]

damn, I forgot about that ._.

oh and you can have the popcorn, I don't like this stuff anyway. wish they had something taster on here.

*walks off with the popcorn*

[rat1]

I would like to point out Te itself isn't sticking to procedures

The set procedure comes from having a goal and a way to achieve that goal. If the goal is not defined, then there can be no set procedure.

[Azeroffs]

If someone asks me what they should do in a given situation, I'll usually 1st ask what they want. Or if I know them well enough, I can help infer what might be genuinely suitable for them.

Often people flail around looking for courses of action, without a reasonable idea of what end they're aiming for, or whether the outcome is aligned with what they truly want to happen. But once desire is clarified and committed to, the will follows and the means to get there tend to avail themselves.

Ah yeah, you made it sound like you were telling people what they should want.

[Lobo]

I guess you're supposed to do it by carefully inquiring about Bob's home address and then stalking him at his house every time your boss needs an appointment

Lol, I bet he would do something like that if under enough stress.

Inability to clearly define your role and responsibilities may have something to do with Te-DS but I am not sure, haven't had much experience with ISPjs in authoritative positions to say whether they tend to behave like this. Static types do tend to have more of this "I want what I want" approach when dealing with others like you describe of your boss. How sure are you that he is ISFj by the way?

I couldn't agree/disagree with you on an example of Te-DS, since I honestly don't understand the nature of the 5th function and how you can then plug in a function there. However, I can say what doesn't ring true for me. I was actually bothered that he didn't have a detailed job description for me, and he seems to add to it as he goes along. I'm at a point right now where I don't just want to follow what a socionics definition says, but to actually validate it with experiences irl.

For the longest time I thought he was INFj. He was my professor for some time, and it didn't really allow me to get to know him that much. His persona during classes was very non-conflict, spiritual, and zen-like. I've had experiences before with female ISFjs who weren't like that at all, and very confrontational, and it seemed to cloud my perception of the type in general. I'm not taking into account a really crazy case: my ESI grade-school teacher. Among the messed up things she did, she got pissed at me once for accidentally dropping a glue gun close to her womb, and asked me: "do you want me to lose my baby?" .

Anyway, I felt similar to him for the most part, that I understood his way of being, the way he carried himself. It was when I started working under him that I realized just how different we were... His background has always been different than mine, him being Chinese and Amitabha Buddhist, etc, non-type factors. But, the way we go about doing things seems foreign to me. He ends up bulldozing through things, even though he always claims that we should follow a standard when it comes to doing tasks. His motto of getting things done in whichever way possible is definitely not something I would agree to. I'm more oriented towards reaching a goal with some "finesse" and efficiency, modifying and designing a process so that we don't waste unnecessary time and money. In his case, he just wants to get the job done, so it's like he doesn't take the time to evaluate how he does things. The end-result is the most important thing, without considering all the consequences in his methods up to that point.

The Fi-leading comes out when he modifies his code of conduct and ethical standards to favor him when he's in an uncomfortable situation, and uses Fi kung-fu to put things on you "just because," with no reasoning other than what he feels at the time. It's uncomfortable to watch because I've been guilty of doing that too.

It just depends on what the process is aiming for. INFjs want this state of perfect harmony. ISFjs want their own plans to be fulfilled.

If by "harmony" you mean fluid and cost-efficient process, then it applies to me.

If anything, it would be the other way around. Being an Involutory (Result) type, ISFjs would be less inclined towards procedural behavior. Whereas INFjs are Evolutory (Process) types, making them more inclined towards stepwise procedural methods.

I'm not really convinced of that Renin Dichotomy. In any case, if ISFjs are really focused on the result, rather than the procedure to get to that result, wouldn't they just stick to something they know gets them to the result? That's what I was getting at. It's also applicable to my boss. I talked about this above, in response to siuntal. Actually, now I'm realizing that I didn't give much attention to the "correct procedure" bit of crazedratshadow's post. I had understood it to just mean a procedure that has been shown to get you to the result, rather than THE correct and best procedure.

I would emphatically disagree that has anything to do with that.

I disagree now with what I said about Ne-creatives more likely to try different ideas, but I still see entertaining new ideas and potential as having to do with though. I've known two ISFjs, including my boss, who come up with crazy and almost out-of-this-world ideas on how to get to a result, and want to try it out. However, I notice that they tend to be unrealistic/impractical, or don't consider a wider range of possibilities, or how things can go wrong throughout. It seems like their desire to think of possibilities is based from a desire to be irrational, rather than considering how those ideas make sense and can actually be done. With my boss he seems to put the work of figuring out how to do things on other people, but when he comes up with some crazy way of doing it, it's kind of awkward for him to defend the idea in the midst of other ideas being thrown in the mix. It quickly goes to "Hmmm, ok, you do it."

[Aiss]

FWIW, I tend to agree that Te - at least -Te, Gamma Te, Te + Ni, however you call it - has something to do with finding an efficient way to reach a goal, optimizing it. The key word being "finding", not there being a method. Set procedures seem like an extremely poor substitute for Te, *possibly* useful for those who lack it - but it seems everyone hates them anyway, so I don't know. I think Te types tend to see ready-made procedures and solutions as useless mostly because they believe they could be far more efficient in any specific situation without being limited by these.

Not sure about how Delta Te differs, but if I were to extrapolate, it would be probably less goal oriented and more open-ended (Ne > Se). Te + Si, optimizing the way of doing things while remaining fairly open and accepting (Fi + Ne) of where it takes them. However, I don't know if it would make them more likely to create/apply procedures or not. On one hand it seems that yes, doing things a certain way rather than aiming at a certain goal would be an essence of "procedural", due to less specific requirements and more room to reuse; on the other hand, lack of clearly expressed goal gives it a degree of freedom.

And yes, I disagree with the idea that process/result has to do with this difference; that is rather Si/Ne vs Se/Ni, IMO. It's probably one of the worst-defined Reinin dichotomies, while we're at it; Gulenko's interpretation of it makes far more sense:

I will frame this dichotomy in the second sense, namely as simplification vs. complication of thought structure. Meaning that in deductive thinking, given a set of simple and obvious statements (axioms, postulates), the resultant consequences can be necessarily derived (theorem). Reasoning flows in the direction of simple to complex. Evolutionary [process] types therefore mentally complicate the situation.

In inductive thinking reasoning proceeds the other way around. Observing and comprehending complex phenomena, inductive thinking reduces them to generalized diagrams and models stripped of details. Involutionary [result] types break down and simplify the situation in order to understand it. Reasoning flows in reverse order from complex to simple.

None of it has to do with goals and procedures. None.

[ashlesha]

something that i absolutely couldn't stand was in a work situation where i was regularly given fuzzy goals with no suggestion for how to implement or standard for when it was reached. like being told to "be more efficient" and then working to find ways to increase efficiency and being told "you're about halfway to where we want you to be, keep it up." is this related to this procedural/Te DS thing or does everyone hate it? i felt like i was just being strung along.

i find step-by-step procedural instructions quite helpful when i am first learning something but i don't want to be tied to them if i find a way of doing things that i prefer. i find that procedures tend to get outgrown as you get used to doing something. but i don't find them completely useless, especially in the beginning.

[Suz]

something that i absolutely couldn't stand was in a work situation where i was regularly given fuzzy goals with no suggestion for how to implement or standard for when it was reached. like being told to "be more efficient" and then working to find ways to increase efficiency and being told "you're about halfway to where we want you to be, keep it up." is this related to this procedural/Te DS thing or does everyone hate it? i felt like i was just being strung along.

i find step-by-step procedural instructions quite helpful when i am first learning something but i don't want to be tied to them if i find a way of doing things that i prefer. i find that procedures tend to get outgrown as you get used to doing something. but i don't find them completely useless, especially in the beginning.

Oh yeah i relate somewhat. All I know is that everytime i was told i'm not efficient I felt defensive and insulted, and I would explain my inefficiency away with how I'm trying to be detailed and how quality cannot be rushed. But when i see useful examples of how to be more efficient I'm really thankful and waste no time incorporating those things into my work practice. I any suggestions about how to make my workflow easier (without sacrificing quality, of course!)

[ashlesha]

Oh yeah i relate somewhat. All I know is that everytime i was told i'm not efficient I felt defensive and insulted, and I would explain my inefficiency away with how I'm trying to be detailed and how quality cannot be rushed. But when i see useful examples of how to be more efficient I'm really thankful and waste no time incorporating those things into my work practice. I any suggestions about how to make my workflow easier (without sacrificing quality, of course!)

yeah there's a difference between, "hey do it better" and "here's how you can do this better." i guess thats true for everyone. it wasn't about efficiency per se, that was an example, but about how there was no external criteria. how did i know if i was doing things right? how did i know if i had done satisfactorily? based on the bosses whims, i guess...ugh. like i much prefer if there is some kind of objective standard. if that makes sense. and i'm curious if thats related to Te DS or just true for everyone.

[Suz]

yeah there's a difference between, "hey do it better" and "here's how you can do this better." i guess thats true for everyone. it wasn't about efficiency per se, that was an example, but about how there was no external criteria. how did i know if i was doing things right? how did i know if i had done satisfactorily? based on the bosses whims, i guess...ugh. like i much prefer if there is some kind of objective standard. if that makes sense. and i'm curious if thats related to Te DS or just true for everyone.

i think it IS related to Te-seeking (DS and HA), because there are lots of people who get annoyed by unsolicited teaching like that.

[Aiss]

^ Alright then, so maybe procedures and such can be a substitute for Te. Still, I think it's a poor one. Either way, they're no real Te.

[rat1]

And that's why it's Te DS, which was the original point.

[ashlesha]

^ Alright then, so maybe procedures and such can be a substitute for Te. Still, I think it's a poor one. Either way, they're no real Te.

lol

this was awhile ago, but i remember wondering if it was a judicious/decisive thing (they were betas). but i can't remember why i wondered that anymore. something about how i wanted some kind of more solid context in which to work. idk, it was probably specious. but if you want to pull something from it, haha.

[Azeroffs]

^ Alright then, so maybe procedures and such can be a substitute for Te. Still, I think it's a poor one. Either way, they're no real Te.

I'd say Te is about setting up 'procedures,' but always finds ways to improve them. 'Procedure' is just another way of saying 'process of action.'

[silke]

Anyway, I felt similar to him for the most part, that I understood his way of being, the way he carried himself. It was when I started working under him that I realized just how different we were... His background has always been different than mine, him being Chinese and Amitabha Buddhist, etc, non-type factors. But, the way we go about doing things seems foreign to me. He ends up bulldozing through things, even though he always claims that we should follow a standard when it comes to doing tasks. His motto of getting things done in whichever way possible is definitely not something I would agree to. ... I'm more oriented towards reaching a goal with some "finesse" and efficiency, modifying and designing a process so that we don't waste unnecessary time and money.

It sounds like you're getting some PoLR hits from him. The "bulldozing" is likely his creative Se which would irk you to see him force it through. He probably appears to be 'sloppy' in the way he does things.

I also don't think that Te is what leads to establishing and following protocols. Te is a judging IE so I'd think that it would simply judge whether a particular goal is worth achieving, help prioritize. The how-to imho is up to perceiving functions. The people who tend to request the step-by-step procedures and explanations from me and favor following established protocols tend to be Si-egos. You're probably looking for some Si from him while he is 'bulldozing' his way through with Se.

... I've known two ISFjs, including my boss, who come up with crazy and almost out-of-this-world ideas on how to get to a result, and want to try it out. However, I notice that they tend to be unrealistic/impractical, or don't consider a wider range of possibilities, or how things can go wrong throughout. It seems like their desire to think of possibilities is based from a desire to be irrational, rather than considering how those ideas make sense and can actually be done. With my boss he seems to put the work of figuring out how to do things on other people, but when he comes up with some crazy way of doing it, it's kind of awkward for him to defend the idea in the midst of other ideas being thrown in the mix. It quickly goes to "Hmmm, ok, you do it."

This is something that I have also noticed about ISFjs, that they will just believe in something (mobilizing Ni?) but when if I ask them to reason through a particular idea or belief they won't actually do it, just kind of insist it is so. That's where they need the help of their dual to explain which of these ideas won't work (creative Ni).

[Lobo]

Thanks for the replies, though the only thing so far that is somewhat in agreement is that Te-DS is related to favoring procedure. I've been thinking that Te-DS is just looking for external validation of Te, rather than some kind of action in particular.

[jughead]

Eh, it doesn't seem that uncommon. It's easy for me to see that it does work and why—especially in terms of having similar thought patterns and values. IME, it tends to take me aback at 1st because I wasn't expecting it. Though that doesn't necessarily mean I want a relationship with every dual that I meet. That depends on a lot of non-Socionics related conditions.

I agree with ashton on this one. Conflict happens at about the same rate, you just generally get the feeling you don't like the person or somethings off and your headed in the wrong direction, potential disaster.

[Azeroffs]

I've been thinking that Te-DS is just looking for external validation of Te, rather than some kind of action in particular.

I'm not sure what you mean.

[Lobo]

I'm not sure what you mean.

What I mean is that you expect them (as in someone out there who usually takes the form of a Te-ego) to appreciate/value your abilities in Te, and do it as a way to get their attention. Sometimes I also think that I might be showing off to people when it comes to talking about how efficient and organized I am, knowing certain facts too, when it's not something that has importance to my ego. I see Te as a tool that I know is very useful for my life but I don't have an attachment to it, so I wouldn't mind being criticized in that area. I find myself switching off the "Te-mode" quite easily when I'm with my IXFp friend(s), or doubt I present much of a threat to people who don't value it if I wanted to. I usually find Te-egos to have an attractive personality, even though some appear as robots to me .

I also don't seem to filter Te as an IE very well... The issue I have with an LSE at work is that whenever he tells me a supposed fact about something it's like I need to analyze what he's saying rather than just counter-arguing with facts. He has a tendency to treat what he thinks as being factual without questioning, and that messes with my head, because I always feel like I need to analyze what he just said, and it's tiring. I used to think that he was intentionally lying and trying to manipulate, which caused me to not like him much.

[Beautiful sky]

Te DS

The desire, wish, and want for someone to amass information, order it, determine what's important in what order, order actions and the way they should be carried out or worked.

[Scapegrace]

For the record: Scapegrace is completely incapable of the above. That's why she's so intellectually inconsistent.

Everyone weep.

[Beautiful sky]

For the record: Scapegrace is completely incapable of the above. That's why she's so intellectually inconsistent.

Everyone weep.

Everyone is capable of reading and comprehending information Scape LOL.

[Scapegrace]

Everyone is capable of reading and comprehending information Scape LOL.

Apparently not everyone.

[Beautiful sky]

Apparently not everyone.

Well, within reason; excuse my generalization (Ne preference).

[Scapegrace]

*giggle cough*

I was referring to you. I said nothing about my reading comprehension skills.

[Beautiful sky]

*giggle cough*

I was referring to you. I said nothing about my reading comprehension skills.

Seemed like you were referring to yourself. So it's a misunderstanding.

[ashlesha]

an attraction to stoic dorky robot people

[Scapegrace]

Seemed like you were referring to yourself. So it's a misunderstanding.

I'm pretty sure you have a difficult time reading and amassing information, Maritsa. May I be so bold as to recommend hooked on phonics?

[Absurd]

[Beautiful sky]

I'm pretty sure you have a difficult time reading and amassing information, Maritsa. May I be so bold as to recommend hooked on phonics?

No. I just take thing literally. Always have been. I was never really able to read books like Shogun because "the mountains are dark beyond the hills" meant just that and not the other side is lurking and is about to attack and kill us. For this reason, many English classes were not my favorite; I excelled and did very well in Math and History.

[Scapegrace]

Okay. I'm still failing to understand how amassing information, ordering it, etc., etc., has to do with reading comprehension.

I'm also having a difficult time understanding why I do all of the above for fun with my Te polr.

Maritsa, please explain. I'm too dumb.

[Beautiful sky]

Okay. I'm still failing to understand how amassing information, ordering it, etc., etc., has to do with reading comprehension.

I'm also having a difficult time understanding why I do all of the above for fun with my Te polr.

Maritsa, please explain. I'm too dumb.

What do you know about Fi for instance Scape?

[Scapegrace]

What do you know about Fi for instance Scape?

Nothing until you write the description for that too. Everyone else is probably wrong.

[Beautiful sky]

Okay. I'm still failing to understand how amassing information, ordering it, etc., etc., has to do with reading comprehension.

I'm also having a difficult time understanding why I do all of the above for fun with my Te polr.

Maritsa, please explain. I'm too dumb.

For example, there might be a lot of information on vaccines, some are filled with warnings and such that scare people; so what Te does is essentially reads all this info, what's dangerous what's not, when to do things etc and determines the reality of the situation; for instance, though a flu vaccine itself may cause some serious side effects, Te might conclude that it's generally safe; what Te DS does is seeks out the bottom line, what's mostly likely, from an algorithmic equation that Te used to judge the info on the flu vaccine; without this, a Te DS is quite capable of reading and amassing info but may not be able to fully determine it's intrinsic value; multiplies the serious side effects information where they get scared of impending and possible bad situations rather than looking at it through general reality.

So essentially Te is determining the value of the information as it relates to reality from an algorithmic equation.

[Scapegrace]

For example, there might be a lot of information on vaccines, some are filled with warnings and such that scare people; so what Te does is essentially reads all this info, what's dangerous what's not, when to do things etc and determines the reality of the situation; for instance, though a flu vaccine itself may cause some serious side effects, Te might conclude that it's generally safe; what Te DS does is seeks out the bottom line, what's mostly likely, from an algorithmic equation that Te used to judge the info on the flu vaccine; without this, a Te DS is quite capable of reading and amassing info but may not be able to fully determine it's intrinsic value; multiplies the serious side effects information where they get scared of impending and possible bad situations rather than looking at it through general reality.

So essentially Te is determining the value of the information as it relates to reality from an algorithmic equation.

Three weeks later. Amazing. Had to wait for that Te to build up, hmm?

What is really hilarious, ironic and sort of tangential about your example is that I have a massive database of medications, their side effects, and interactions stored in my little Te polr pea brain for no reason.

[Beautiful sky]

Three weeks later. Amazing. Had to wait for that Te to build up, hmm?

What is really hilarious, ironic and sort of tangential about your example is that I have a massive database of medications, their side effects, and interactions stored in my little Te polr pea brain for no reason.

It's not about storing the info alone; it's about evaluating it's value;

[Scapegrace]

I get it. Your Te works better than mine. That's why you understand both the value of semicolon and how to use it.