Ti vs Te

[XoX]

How about a discussion of Ti vs Te? I scored pretty high on both when I did the functions test. Te should be strong but Ti should be my 8th and "sleeping" function. How does the difference in Ti and Te manifest itself in practice? I feel like sometimes I overanalyze things. I'm always seeking the logic behind a phenomena. And I have trouble admitting that maybe not all phenomenon follow the rules of logic. Am I relying on my Ti without knowing it? I have worked with an INTj for quite a long time and maybe this has made me unconsciously rely on my Ti in many cases and becoming overly analytical

[Wavebury]

Anaylzing things means nothing in itself, only when it takes on a very strict thought pattern could it be considered . I know because I do the same thing, but Im not , I realized that my though patterns are nore than , even I thought that " is about introversion+'thinking' therefore I must be ."

I think the difference between and can only really be seen in an ExTJ/IxTJ contrary pair, despite Ganin's comparison's of an INTP's logic to an INTJ's logic.

[FDG]

Yes, I agree Cheerio.

The ENTj will keep saying how to do things, the INTj will keep saying why to do things.

[Expat]

is about analysing data, is about expressing or using them, either as ideas or in action.

A good illustration is given by the ESFj-INTj duality.

An ESFj likes to report, in sequence, concrete events and experiences. The INTj listens and gives his/her analysis of what the ESFj reports. The INTj provides the that the ESFj lacks and unconsciously expects.

An ENTj can provide this in an relationship with an ESFj, but it is not a natural thing. The ENTj's drive is not to listen to the events the ESFj is listing, but to explain his own ideas and thoughts. This is one of the aspects of the super-ego relationship between ESFj and ENTj.

Also - and I'm not sure about this - the INTj's analysis is truly independent, whereas the analysis of dominant types probably make as much use as possible of stored information found elsewhere.

[Wavebury]

[quote="Expat
Also - and I'm not sure about this - the INTj's analysis is truly independent, whereas the analysis of dominant types probably make as much use as possible of stored information found elsewhere.[/quote]

Correct, introverted functions pick up on information from the subconscious, whereas extraverted ones pick up info from objective sources.

[Rocky]

Te is more about being able to explain things in the objective world. It juxtaposes (is that a word? I don't care...) facts and objectives and the like, and tries to make a decision on things the way they happen and on fold in the outside world. It's also more "efficient", and "productive"; positive.

Ti is about "structures", "rules", and "laws". It can cut itself off from the outside facts to reorganize them to fit their logical frame work. It's like taking little bits from the outside world, and using them to create systems, and they expect everythying to fit their "system" without using much explaination for it. This is what Cone was talking about when he said INTjs were "anti-positive". I don't think all INTjs are like this, as some can overcome the lack of Te (just like an Si dominant can overcome Se, an Ni dominant can overcome Ne, etc...). I remember Pedro-the-Lion saying something like he was trying to "learn" how to use Te more.

This is what gugu_baba posted in that Alpha thread recently in response to Cone when he said INTjs were "anti-positive".

That's means that you believe that some things cannot be explained.

just to translate this in term of functions, that's basically, including what you've explained above, the difference of Ti and Te. INTps have an objective thought process, they have so that's why their interest is the facts, the positive world. INTjs have a little more "dizzy" image of the facts, because of the which focuses more on correlation, (all introverted functions are basically about correlation with past memories)
that is putting in order the thoughts, the facts gathered, rather than just grab them and make use of them at the moment. From here the title of "anti-positivists" that our wonderful Cone came up with. And Cone in the end both Te and Ti are functions of objective judgement, so I don't know if it's really apposite to say Ti is anti-positive, It's the same target, analyze of the objective world, but the means are different.

to sum up
is practical judgement
is more about correlation, which of course presuposes use of first

I was reading your post, and agreeing with you. Until here, where you seem to get more 'negative' about things.

Nah, I don't think it's negative, it's a fair statement. I'm always trying to give meaningful and general explanations to this forum, not based on subjectivity. I don't wish to deceive people. I like accuracy. And it's not that far from the truth, in the end.

[mimisor]

Ti is about "structures", "rules", and "laws". It can cut itself off from the outside facts to reorganize them to fit their logical frame work. It's like taking little bits from the outside world, and using them to create systems, and they expect everythying to fit their "system" without using much explaination for it. This is what Cone was talking about when he said INTjs were "anti-positive". I don't think all INTjs are like this, as some can overcome the lack of Te (just like an Si dominant can overcome Se, an Ni dominant can overcome Ne, etc...). I remember Pedro-the-Lion saying something like he was trying to "learn" how to use Te more.

That's a good explanation of Ti, Rocky.

Ti is like a filter, I always have to make a decision in my mind what Te data to accept and what data should I reject.
And from here the "dizzy" mind because some facts are simply ignored.
So yeah I admit Ti is half anti-positive, we could say so.


EDIT And when I realize that something in the objective world is inconsistent with the "system" created to the point I'll have to reformate the system over and over again.

[Creepy-msk]

Anaylzing things means nothing in itself, only when it takes on a very strict thought pattern could it be considered . I know because I do the same thing, but Im not , I realized that my though patterns are nore than , even I thought that " is about introversion+'thinking' therefore I must be ."

I think the difference between and can only really be seen in an ExTJ/IxTJ contrary pair, despite Ganin's comparison's of an INTP's logic to an INTJ's logic.

could you please link me to this description or tell me where to find it (in what section)? I am talking about Ganin's comparison you mention, as i have not found a formal description of this anywhere.

[tempus]

Jung on the difference between Te and Ti:

"Just as Darwin might possibly represent the normal extraverted thinking type, so we might point to Kant as a counter-example of the normal introverted thinking type. The former speaks with facts; the latter appeals to the subjective factor. Darwin ranges over the wide fields of objective facts, while Kant restricts himself to a critique of knowledge in general. But suppose a Cuvier be contrasted with a Nietzsche: the antithesis becomes even sharper.

The introverted thinking type is characterized by a priority of the thinking I have just described. Like his [p. 485] extraverted parallel, he is decisively influenced by ideas; these, however, have their origin, not in the objective data but in the subjective foundation. Like the extravert, he too will follow his ideas, but in the reverse direction: inwardly not outwardly. Intensity is his aim, not extensity. In these fundamental characters he differs markedly, indeed quite unmistakably from his extraverted parallel."

....In simpler terms, the difference between Te and Ti is like the difference between knowing and understanding. Te types focus on expanding their knowledge of objective reality; Ti types have more of a desire to seek to interpret objective reality.

[Gilly]

Ti types have more of a desire to seek to interpret objective reality.

That = Story of my life.

My god, I can't believe I ever thought I was anything but ENTp.

[XoX]

Thanks for answers. I think the Te = "how" and Ti = "why" explanation gives a simple tool to help me understand when I'm using which function.

This thing has great effect on my duality relationships too. If I believe the theory then using Te supports ENFp hidden agenda function = GOOD, using Ti puts pressure on ENFp PoLR function = BAD. So I just try to concentrate on the "how" part from now on . Sentence like "I agree the answer is definately X! And I can show you how to apply it to solve a real world problem..." is way better than "I seriously doubt the answer is X...why would it be X? Could you explain me your logic?" when interacting with an ENFp I guess...

I think my INTj interaction has really messed my head. And my long time ENTp boss didn't help at all. No wonder I sometimes had feelings a burn out is just behind the corner. I'm not sure if I can ever go back to the typical ISTp "I just know" thinking. Academic studies and learning to question everything is bad for ISTp mental health. Better just keep things simple and go with the gut feeling...Maybe long time interaction with my dual would repair the damage done to my brain

[Wavebury]

Anaylzing things means nothing in itself, only when it takes on a very strict thought pattern could it be considered . I know because I do the same thing, but Im not , I realized that my though patterns are nore than , even I thought that " is about introversion+'thinking' therefore I must be ."

I think the difference between and can only really be seen in an ExTJ/IxTJ contrary pair, despite Ganin's comparison's of an INTP's logic to an INTJ's logic.

could you please link me to this description or tell me where to find it (in what section)? I am talking about Ganin's comparison you mention, as i have not found a formal description of this anywhere.

http://www.socionics.com/advan/intjorintp.htm

Let's take a look at INTj's main function - introverted thinking (). INTjs are mainly interested in accumulating an understanding. They want to know why and what causes things happen the way they happen. They want to know and see the logic behind everything. If "it" does not contradict logic then "it" is right, otherwise "it" is wrong. INTps on the other hand seem to be logical too as their second strong function is extroverted thinking (). However, if for INTjs it is about gaining understanding, for INTps it is about exercising their knowledge, and therefore they mostly concern themselves with known facts. Moreover, INTj's logic is their area of confidence and conservatism. This makes their logic fundamental, meaning once the rules are established, they can be applied anywhere. INTps logic is their area of creativity. This makes their logic circumstantial and unpredictable - the rules apply here but may not apply there.

As Ganin shows, you cant compare the an INTP and an INTjs logic very well, because both are very different due to their position in the psyché, not merely because of extraversion and introversion.

Comparing an INTJ and ENTJ, that might be intersting to get a glimpse of their use of logic.

[Kirana]

is about analysing data, is about expressing or using them, either as ideas or in action.

A good illustration is given by the ESFj-INTj duality.

An ESFj likes to report, in sequence, concrete events and experiences. The INTj listens and gives his/her analysis of what the ESFj reports. The INTj provides the that the ESFj lacks and unconsciously expects.

An ENTj can provide this in an relationship with an ESFj, but it is not a natural thing. The ENTj's drive is not to listen to the events the ESFj is listing, but to explain his own ideas and thoughts. This is one of the aspects of the super-ego relationship between ESFj and ENTj.

Also - and I'm not sure about this - the INTj's analysis is truly independent, whereas the analysis of dominant types probably make as much use as possible of stored information found elsewhere.

i like you expat. i don't have to say anything if you reach the topic first.

my Te is almost as strong as my Ti, as i recall. i don't know if it has always been so, or if i've been forced to use it more through my engineering degree and at work. i hate having to work out how, though. i still hate details, although i am able to translate a theoretical system to something practical and detailed. i guess the strong Te also makes me able to do scheduling well, and have a fine control over project budgets.

and you're right about the ESFj-INTj thing. what typically happens between my friend and i - my friend would tell me about something that happened or bothering her, and then i'd respond, "that means..."

[mimisor]

....In simpler terms, the difference between Te and Ti is like the difference between knowing and understanding. Te types focus on expanding their knowledge of objective reality; Ti types have more of a desire to seek to interpret objective reality.

yep, I agree with this as well. For that reason, because Ti seeks to understand, it blocks Te temporary, as not all the information can be assimilated at once.

[mimisor]

It just occured to me another idea

is reformation of the objective world

is the reflection of the objective world

[Dmitri Lytov]

Quoted from my Introduction into Socionics at www.socioniko.net :

AS THE FIRST FUNCTION:

Extraverted logic is also called Processual or Practical Logic.

It estimates everything in terms of efficiency: not abstract analysis, but "how to make it work?", and not systems, but methods. They are energetic, active, and mobile. As scientists, they are strong in improvement of methods, but often they choose a business career. However, people who work together with them, often blame these types of being "too dry, cold-hearted", even in spite of their high emotionality. In general, this type of thinking may be called “algorithmic”.

Examples: Brad Pitt, John Kennedy, Boris Yeltsin, Tony Blair, Helmut Kohl, Margaret Thatcher, Uma Thurman, Bruce Willis, Milla Jovovich, Jack London, Bill Gates.

Logical-intuitive extravert: http://www.socioniko.net/en/1.1.types/pt.html

Logical-sensory extravert: http://www.socioniko.net/en/1.1.types/ps.html

Introverted logic is also called Systematic Logic, or Structural Logic.

This type of logic is inertial. Instead of “making things work”, it rather focuses on elimination of contradictions, on systematization, or in more general meaning – on “justice” (if it only exists). The types for which this function is dominant are often not too energetic, they are rather stable-mooded, work without noticeable “falls” and “rises”, logical and reticent in their sayings and deeds. On the one hand, other people respect them for being “just”, for their cold and sober analysis of situations; on the other, they do not “feel people” well.

Examples: Vladimir Putin, Joseph Stalin, Harry Truman, Alain Delon, Patricia Kaas, Kevin Costner, Isabelle Huppert, Anton Chekhov, Clint Eastwood, Slobodan Miloshevich, Donald Rumsfeld.

Logical-intuitive introvert: http://www.socioniko.net/en/1.1.types/li.html

Logical-sensory introvert: http://www.socioniko.net/en/1.1.types/lf.html

AS THE SECOND FUNCTION:

Secondary introverted logic (the types Seeker and Legionnaire, XXX-logical extraverts)

They may be misperceived for the quasi-identical types (Enterpriser and Administrator with the dominant extraverted logic) for their activity and logical way of thinking. The difference is, that both Seeker and Legionnaire are spontaneous types, who do not like to adapt to procedures. Their thinking is conceptual, not methodological; often they can even contradict to what they just have said, but they do not accept such reproaches: “What happened, I just considered the situation from different viewpoints!” Legionnaires (sensory) often are good as crisis managers, military commanders, heads of the state in crisis situations (Churchill, Lenin, Napoleon Bonaparte), but quickly get bored of complicated procedures that exist in peaceful democratic states. They often like “cat-and-mouse” logical discussion, where important is not to find the truth but to win, to “kill” the opponent with arguments. Seekers (intuitive) often become scientists and specialists who present interesting concepts, but very rarely (and often with somebody else's help) they succeed to transform their concepts into working technologies and methods. Their activity is not even: sometimes they are super-active, sometimes fall into periods of depression.

Secondary extraverted logic (the types Critic and Craftsman, XXX-logical introverts)

They may be misperceived for the quasi-identical types (Analyst and Inspector with the dominant introverted logic) for their calm logical emotionless manner of explaining their views, and for certain vital conservatism. However, the difference is, that they do not strive for being consistent and systematic in their thoughts – on the contrary, they strive for adaptation to ever-changing situation, and thus their sayings often look incomplete or vague. Carl Gustav Jung, although some typologists think he was an Analyst, not Critic, wrote in a very vague, ambiguous way, often left his ideas uncompleted, and even his typology was for him just a “by-product”. Often the facial expression of Critics and Craftsmen is skeptical, with a characteristic grin (Critic: Meg Ryan, Woody Allen; Craftsman: Meryl Streep, Harvey Keitel). They prefer not to present their own concepts but rather to criticize our people for imperfect, contradictory concepts. These two types may be also called “anti-enthusiasts” – they like to warn other people against insufficiently considered, unreasoned spontaneous actions, and hate very much excessive emotions.