General Principles of the Dominant Functions

[Brilliand]

- Everything in the world must comply with a certain order and system. This is the core of life on which everything else relies; if it is taken out, everything else collapses. It is crucial to understand this system, to develop and improve it, and to find everyone's place in it.

Maybe it's just putting too much emphasis on what should be done with it.

[717495]

is essentially logical and analytical; dominants I know seem really into figuring out the math and logic of phenomenon or theory, into problem solving, whatever interest comes up, and a number of them are really curious to know of and have some design for life or events. I don't think it means that dominants have everything figured out, and they know what the system for all the underlying processes are, but they're the types most willing and capable to figure it out, and probably gain a lot of structural insight as they mature. They also tend to believe in that kind of thing, I know lots of people who don't even really care or think that structuredly and analytically, where as the dominants I know seem plenty interested in the logic of underlying processes and often have a lot of self-assuredness about it.

[Brilliand]

is essentially logical and analytical; dominants I know seem really into figuring out the math and logic of phenomenon or theory, into problem solving, whatever interest comes up, and a number of them are really curious to know of and have some design for life or events. I don't think it means that dominants have everything figured out, and they know what the system for all the underlying processes are, but they're the types most willing and capable to figure it out, and probably gain a lot of structural insight as they mature. They also tend to believe in that kind of thing, I know lots of people who don't even really care or think that structuredly and analytically, where as the dominants I know seem plenty interested in the logic of underlying processes and often have a lot of self-assuredness about it.

It's more the "must uphold the structure and put everyone where they belong" vibe that turned me off. I view the structure more as something inescapable to be understood.

[717495]

I think it implies "uphold" or "seek out," either being one's personal choice and depending on one's certainties, though certainly "inescapable."

[Galen]

All of those examples feel so stereotyped to the point of unrealism. I could imagine valuers identifying 100% with the description; valuing is more than just "people" or "morals", valuing is more than just "efficiency", blah blah blah etc. It feels like nobody can write a book about socionics with describing the IEs in a manner like this, and it annoys the shit out of me ughhhhh

[squark]

Take out the word "must" in the Ti description, and I'm a lot happier with it. The way it comes across is as though we're forcing everything into an artificial structure whether or not it really fits. Everything does fit into an overarching scheme, but it's a process of discovering that, and how things fit that I see as Ti, not jamming things in because they're "supposed" to be somewhere.