As far as the analogy, you shouldn't compare me to some random person on the internet who knows nothing about time travel. I have relatively thorough understanding of the theory, so explain or at least give me a link. Or at the very least, don't call people out when you're not willing to explain.Originally Posted by crazedrat360
Are you referring to your post about the weakness of INFps etc etc as your description of 'flaws in a system' (Ti)? If so, how does lacking specific and intricate explanation constitute as something that is structural by nature, i.e. naturally involving a string of reason to arrive at your conclusions that those are flaws in another system?
You say a focus on facts reduces imagination, but keep in mind this focus prevents over thinking and over analysation, something associated with Ti, which means it would prevent over thinking getting in the way of getting something done, meaning possibly less thinking about the task at hand than Ti. I've often seen gamma portrayed as some of the most quick and efficient workers (Te + Se values). Also, I think ILIs were one of the most stereotypical types to reduce things to relativism and subjectivity.
@this topic in general;
Based on the general Te discussion in this forum, if you're a Te ego you have a promising career washing dishes. Come on guys, that analogy doesn't make a lot of sense no matter what perspective you're describing Te from.
Second, you don't have to subjectivize the elements from the perspective of your type in order to identify them; it is perfectly possible to type people and not bring your type, your valued functions or your intertype relations with the person into the typing process.
Why? all its saying is that Te egos focus on information in a more objective way, whereas merry types are more subjective in their assertions. Not sure howthats degrading or demeaning to anyone, could you perhaps explain what you meant?
I don't think it's degrading or demeaning, just that it lacks analogous value. The idea that a Te type will unrelentingly bother someone about their method of dishwashing to the point of causing discomfort is an extention of an already vague and simplified part of the theory; that is that Te types are concerned with efficient method. If you want to be overly theory-technical about things like the dishwashing analogy, bothersome behavior is supposedly recieved from unvalued functions, so if I were a Te type I could use the exact same analogy to describe my dislike of Fe.
I guess. But if they're not doing justice to the theory here and are reassuring each other that they are they will feel justified projecting the discussion matter in this topic into other topics. If there is a problem with the discussion here it should be addressed before leaking elsewhere. Not that I think this topic is guilty of anything major.
Fine
.
abstract, sensual, impartial, partialI think it makes sense that the id comes out stronger than the super-ego for the simple reason that they are somewhat related to the ego.
What? No. That makes no sense at all. In what way exactly are they "somewhat related" moreso than say the dominant and the role function? Why is Ni & Si less alike than Ni & Ne?
people who focus on abstract things are going to be less aware of sensual things and vice versa. people who focus on impartial judgment are less aware of partial judgment and vice versa. Ni and Ne are both abstract, so the abstract person is going to be more aware of them than Si and Se. Seems pretty basic.
This seems to be the main point in question. Does the ego really repress the id? I was under the impression that it was just disregarded, and not suppressed. There is no reason for it to be suppressed.The ego also repressed the id. The ego balanced the id and superego. Nothing about the ego specifically favors the id over the superego.
But basically what it seems like you're saying is that The ego is strong, and so the super-id is weak, but the super-ego and id are arbitrary.
If you think that the ego suppresses the id, that makes sense. Would you agree that the id would always be stronger if it wasn't suppressed by the ego?
I'm inclined to agree with you here.In model A information moves readily in function blocks like Ij/Ep or Ip/Ej.
It's also considered easier to move from Ni to Ne than from Ni to Si, etc.
Where do these rules come from? They are completely arbitrary. Any justification you give for them I can give a counter justification for the opposite rule being true.
Still donno what you mean here and by information flow. I've heard that information flows from 1 to 2 to 3 etc from a source but there didn't seem to be any significance to it. So what is the significance of 'information flow'?There are types whose function blocks are all Ij/Ip and Ej/Ep, like a Ni/Ti INFp, and who have the superego dominant over the id.
why?and you had mentioned there should be 16 instead of 8 blocks?
Right.
.
Last edited by crazedrat; 10-07-2010 at 02:50 AM.
You'd be surprised how often this turns out to work the opposite way in practice.
No one can expect to be considered an objective thinker by default. Claims to objectivity have to be justified. Socionics should not challenge such an elementary principle.
. Just fyi. I appreciated that post a good deal.
Not a rule, just a trend.
IEI. Probably Fe subtype. Pretty sure I'm E4, sexual instinctual type, fairly confident that I'm a 3 wing now, so: IEI-Fe E4w3 sx/so. Considering 3w4 now, but pretty sure that 4 fits the best.
Yes 'a ma'am that's pretty music...
I am grateful for the mystery of the soul, because without it, there could be no contemplation, except of the mysteries of divinity, which are far more dangerous to get wrong.
Ease of process-ability doesn't imply strength of awareness. N types are most aware of N elements. IP types are not most aware of Pi elements.abstract, sensual, impartial, partial
people who focus on abstract things are going to be less aware of sensual things and vice versa. people who focus on impartial judgment are less aware of partial judgment and vice versa.
On the same note people who are Ip process that format more easily than Ep. You fail to see the point entirely and then get lost in semantics. What a waste of time.
No, disregarded and suppressed are important distinctions. If something is disregarded, it doesn't mean it is weak, while if it is suppressed it does.This seems to be the main point in question. Does the ego really repress the id? I was under the impression that it was just disregarded, and not suppressed. There is no reason for it to be suppressed.
More semantic bullshit. Great.
The ego controls your impulses.
You can pretend that the words don't mean what they mean if you want.
But you agree that regardless, the ego is still strong?But basically what it seems like you're saying is that The ego is strong, and so the super-id is weak, but the super-ego and id are arbitrary.
Pretty much. I actually want to take it one step farther and say model A overvalues the ego. A person can be dominated by their id for example. Think of a drug addict and compare that with a person who controls their impulses and thinks before acting.
This discussion is interesting me less and less.. Obviously you've deviated from model-A. I'd need to hear a more complete explanation of your thoughts. You can't expect me to try to build everything from the ground up without having really any idea where you're coming from especially since you're not willing to give a thorough explanation and more interested in trying to insult me.
So are Ti's, it's just that the focus is less about pragmatic issues and more on mental competence. Ti's exemplify "correctness" and theoretical thinking as a whole, and when it's paired with Se it manifests a sense of authority in which it feels a right to implement those subjective "findings" onto others. This is not to say either Te or Ti is less harsh or superior, rather both are a form of mental discomfort to those who possess it as a PoLR.
In the case of Ti PoLR's, Ti works as a form of mental, or "problem solving" incompetence made to make them feel stupid, just as Te PoLR works to make IEI/SEI feel inferior in accomplishing practical matters
Se PoLR's would not be grateful to any sort of aggressive tactics being used as a form of motivationStupid metaphor...a yellojacket buzzes you and is annoying looking for openings...it pisses many people off and they kill the fucker. A bee doesn't warn you it just comes straight for you, aggressive style. But I'm not a fucking bee, and you don't mess with me. We speak different languages. EII would be grateful at LSE's logical aggresion because it gets them moving and working. To me its just plain arrogrant asshole behavior and stupid.
EII INFj
Forum status: retired
I'd personally say that "getting it done in the way you have to think about it the least" is just one particular version of "best". Even atype has to take into account subjective preferences when he's trying to decide the best method to accomplish something, otherwise how could we be expected to become good entrepreneurs, for example?
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
Just forget this. I didn't explain this perfectly which is why I avoided discussing it in the first place.
Last edited by crazedrat; 10-07-2010 at 06:32 AM.
What I was trying to say was basically Ni & Ti can be ego & the superego functions can become the id functions. The superego functions are always 'weaker' insofar as unconsciousness is considered weaker. That is a semantic problem in itself and I don't think strong vs. weak is a good way to describe the functions at all. Conscious vs. Unconscious is better. But my problem is with the limitations of the function blocks for the ego, & for automatically labeling Si & Te as superego of an INFp for example.. it can be id in some cases. That is all
If the super-ego is suppressed by the ego (which I agree it is), and the id complements the super-ego, why would it necessarily be stronger? It doesn't have closer ties to the ego, either in conscious awareness or function nature; the only reason it can be supposed as strong, is because it doesn't directly oppose the ego.
I think the real function feedback loop, is between the super-id and ego -- that the former works in an almost pre-conscious manner when the latter is 'turned on.' Ni will always have to assume concrete objects and their boundaries before it starts tying them together on an abstract level; and with subtype emphasis, the information will naturally flow to one super-id function before the other as a filtering mechanism, which will then color the way a person deals with super-ego and id information when presented with it.
This is flawed. N, S, T and F are arbitrary dichotomies. You could say the same about object/field etc., but at least those actually describe how functions work, not just abstract traits they happen to have.Ease of process-ability doesn't imply strength of awareness. N types are most aware of N elements. IP types are not most aware of Pi elements.
Pi, Ji, Pe, Je. These best correspond to external realms of focus. This perspective better explains crazedrat's position, because you can see how a Pi-emphasized IP would naturally have Ji emphasized in his super-id, and the enhanced distance from Id elements.
well, I think with an INFp, Si and Te are always going to be in the most direct opposition to their natural state. But I agree that id functions can be equally grating, and super-ego functions don't always prove a burden.
with Ni and Ti as the ego -- this makes sense in terms of feedback loops. with an Ni-INFp, the information would flow from Ni (which basically implies the activation of Se) to Ti (Pi emphasis on refining fields), then to Fe as a 'final stage' (because it is the most filtered form of the INFp's information), and most likely reshifted to Se. this can't be traced to any set of behaviors, but it makes sense in considering how different types convey information, and how temperaments would influence it.
I also agree that strong and weak are completely flawed terms. It is simply a matter of affinity or aversion (actually, electron pairing illustrates function feedback loops in a way). When it comes to conscious and unconscious, the line isn't as simple as being literally focused in direct awareness vs. repressed into instinctive awareness, because the lenses of perception are too connected. but I'm not fully sure how to qualify it yet, so I'll leave it at that.
It's not just subjective affinity or aversion though, because our Super Id functions are the ones we are most attracted to, and are yet inherently weaker in that our Id functions.
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
There is a 'distance' in perception between ego and super-id functions, which is why this attraction is so strong, and why the feedback loop between them is primary. Id functions are pretty neutral, if you take ego functions as the central point, so positing them as "strong" is oversimplifying the issue. The same goes for super-id functions being weak; they are obviously nowhere near as honed as ego functions, yet their priority in information processing is higher than super-ego or id functions, and that says something about ego functions themselves.
Well think about the INFps who are always trying to establish a framework of logic, like you or me. Si and Te is more of an id thing in that case. And I can be attacked quite effectively by either calling me an asshole or saying I don't do anything in sort of an Ne way. Just giving it a qualitative assessment Ne Fi acts more like a superego to me than Te Si does. Te Si can still piss me the hell off. But if I'm rejecting the whole Ni Fe function block constriction I might as well say there's no clear reason why a type has to be limited to having the certain id functions.
I'm not trying to say that this id / superego switch is a necessary byproduct of the Ni/Ti switch though. Actually the whole Ni Ti bit would probably rearrange the superego and id blocks into something like Fi / Si and Ne / Te.
If that didnt make much sense it's cuz Ive been away a looong time and I'm in a zombie state.
I actually think that could make some sense. With NeTe acting as an "id" of sorts to NiTi, you would still have the casual dismissal of Ne, along with the distant rejection of Te's intrusion on the Ti structure; and SiFi would make sense as a nuisance because of its combined effect (involved fields distorting the perception of abstract fields), also considering that it imposes on the "secondary" feedback loop, FeSe. Though I still think that temperament alters subtype focus, given the differing social attitudes and overall goals of the two.
Ultimately, instead of having linear segments denote the priority of information, you would have different levels of information that corresponded to certain external realms (Pi, Ji, Pe, Je); so, the attitudes taken by a type would better reflect the actual information, and not just how it can be expressed in certain situations.
Well from a subjective perspective, I think we are more likely to actively utilize our Super-Id functions, whereas the Id functions are more something we do without noticing, a sort of background process to the Ego. Super-Ego functions are things we have to "try" at, which involves divesting in our optimal mode of functioning. I think we usually manifest the Super-Id through the Ego, or at least with the Ego as a cognitive context for their implementation or presentation, which, I sense, is what you're getting at with the Ni-Ti stuff, which also applies to Fe-Se (obviously this is just in Betas, and therefore presumably subconsciously in Deltas). But I think we actually have the hardest time manifesting the Super-Id in pure form.
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
I don't think the super-id is ever manifested in pure form, or the ego for that matter, even if the latter is more readily distinct; just that they are inextricable in function, and therefore that super-id functions will have a stronger influence on the cognition of a person than id or super-ego. And that consequently, one will never 'use' the other two blocks of functions in the same way, because they operate on diametric 'axes'; one may come in contact with them, most likely incorporate what is gleaned into their primary 'axis', but never actually operate from the vantage point of the other.
Hm. Well it's hard to separate. Personally I think that the Ego and the Super-Ego are the two that we utilize in surface-consciousness, and that they sort of compete for this surface consciousness, while they are each fueled below the level of immediate consciousness by their complimentary processes, which tend to manifest as impressions or forces from within the self; they are not "controlled" or "piloted" in the manner of the ego or super-ego, but rather experienced directly in an unfiltered fashion.
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
How can an NeTi see itself as both shallow and needlessly complicated? Is this is the dominant function only? If so, I would need your source so I could verify that this extention of theory makes sense and had anecdotal evidence. Also, I offer myself as a counter example to this inherent bias when describing the theoretical elements. I see an element as a neutral thing, neither inherently negative nor positive and have done so through different self-typings.
I have observed this, but in my experience (FWIW) this framework is suboordinate to Ni, not Ti. If we conventionally define logic as premis based conclusions Ni has no problems being capable of logic, but this framework of logic is achieved through a combination of Ti valuing and Ni ego, not a Ni-Ti ego switch. What you're describing I think is consistent with model A and not in need of an INFp - Ti hybrid type.
Also, the id block is second to the ego in strength. That is what model A states and is shown in the descriptions, ex. the ISTj provides for the ENFj's Si needs without putting explicit emphasis on the function, which would cause the ENFj discomfort. Just like how the ENFj recognizes options and opportunities when it counts but doesn't put as much explicit emphasis on it as an INFj would. ENFj also builds and recognizes 'Fi' bonds naturally without having to directly use Fi, etc.
My post was originally really long and I had to delete parts of it so it lost part of its meaning; now it seems I sound like an asshole who claims to be some inhuman socionics expert. What I meant to say was that I am unbiased when I look specifically at the descriptions and when I describe the IEs; in real life, I am totally biased and make judgements about people all the time. Since it seemed to me that you were pointing out that an IEI will inherently dislike the Te element even at its basic theoretical format I thought it was necessary to point out that this is not always true, myself being the exception to this rule.
I took issue with the dishwashing example because it didn't even relate to Te conflict, but rather some unreal situation that was created from the Te description and not real live Te examples of an IEI in conflict with Te ego, so it was unreal and didn't make sense no matter what perspective you consider it from. I won't shorten this so I get the point accross, but yeah I find it's a real eyesore to see 5 straight lines of text.
I'll re read the earlier part and see if I can catch what you meant.
Yep.
This reversal of the superego / id rings would also change the intertype relations. It would actually make them far more detailed, because we would now have 64 distinct type combinations. But an ENFp would be the superego type to certain INFps. I can tell you from experience superego describes my relationship with ENFps better than contrary. ENFps are always calling me out for some moral transgression. The other day I asked an ENFp if she was a transexual (and she was). That didn't go well at all.
The two words superego and contrary have similar connotations, so I just fudged the relationship in my mind for a long time. But with ISTps I'm always picking fights. I feel like I need to fight them to take them down a notch. They think they're better than I am.
I can tell you something else. If I had more Se and Fe in my life.. like a girl with alot of both, my life would change a ton. I don't need a theory tell me that. I always like the ESTps with alot of Fe the best, actually.
There will also be sub quadras and then sub sub quadras depending on the ego rings and then the id / superego rings.
There is no structural reason a type cannot have Ni and Ti in the ego. You're saying it's achieved through "Ti valuing and Ni ego".. that's a convenient way of dismissing the phenomenon with semantics. Tell me why the ego blocks must be limited to an extraverted and introverted function pair. That information would be more pertinent.
What is the difference between valuing it and having it in the ego to you? Why make the distinction but not elaborate on how it's meaningful? I use Ti with deliberation and strength. Infact my Ti is very conscious, I consider my Fe more unconscious.
Strength is a meaningless distinction. Consciousness would be better. We are more consciously aware of the id functions because they surge into consciousness from the unconscious.
A Ni/Ti ego types demonstrative function would be either Te or Fi depending on the id / superego ring. Te demonstrative vs Fi demonstrative in this context would be like working out the intricate details for a plan of action, thereby demonstrating either what can be done or what should be considered. But the demonstrative function always has an air of desperation to it.
Last edited by crazedrat; 10-07-2010 at 11:05 PM.
Well I haven't encountered the reasoning behind the necessity of one introverted and one extroverted function in the ego, so I'm in no position to say it's impossible. I can only say it's not consistent with model A, but again, without a reason it doesn't matter whether or not it's consistent and you may be right.
The distinction of conciousness and strength is true also when we're talking about the actual concious mind of the individual. However, the id functions still function in the background and, I think, are just as much developed as the ego functions (as one presupposes the other).
What you say last doesn't quite make sense to me because I haven't really followed this page of the topic very well, so I may read consider it later after having read the rest of this.
Developed is also a meaningless word. Conscious is really the best word. The word developed used to describe the ego implies the unconscious functions are deficient, but any deficiency in the unconscious functions has to also exist in the conscious functions. All the functions are linked, they're all just as deficient and efficient as the others. The only good distinctions made between them are qualitative. The id functions have a higher level of consciousness associated with them than the superego functions, that is all.
There are times when we are primarily using our unconscious functions, like with learning. When you learn you are basically organizing your unconscious. When I learn I am thinking about how everything impacts everything else. I am using Se when I learn. It's an unconventional use of Se by most standards, but it is formally Se nonetheless. And infact I can only really do a task physically after I have completely commited the act of doing the task to memory. When I learn I commit the impact everything has on everything else to memory. Yes you do it with the help of the ego to find pertinent information, and we never fully shut off any of the functions, but are you willing to say your unconscious mind is inherently flawed compared to your conscious mind?
If you want to keep talking about this we will have to do it at socionix.com. I refuse to contribute any good theoretical discussion to this website.
Last edited by crazedrat; 10-08-2010 at 02:16 AM.
Agreed. And even then, whatever "divide" exists between conscious and unconscious doesn't need to be some glitch in the loop where things reverse; Model A doesn't really explain how 'unconscious processing' operates, but rather assigns descriptors to the word.
The impacts thing makes sense. I see Ni working in that rhythmic, recursive manner in general. Se perceives points of condensed energy, and Ni looks for how the energy developed to those specific points. Once that process is embedded, the functioning feels almost automatic.There are times when we are primarily using our unconscious functions, like with learning. When you learn you are basically organizing your unconscious. When I learn I am thinking about how everything impacts everything else. I am using Se when I learn. It's an unconventional use of Se by most standards, but it is formally Se nonetheless. And infact I can only really do a task physically after I have completely commited the act of doing the task to memory. When I learn I commit the impact everything has on everything else to memory. Yes you do it with the help of the ego to find pertinent information, and we never fully shut off any of the functions, but are you willing to say your unconscious mind is inherently flawed compared to your conscious mind?
browsed through there today, activity doesn't seem to be picking up, but the discussion quality is still solid.If you want to keep talking about this we will have to do it at socionix.com. I refuse to contribute any good theoretical discussion to this website.
yeah, I've found the Se-SLEs' energy to be the easiest for me to deal with. They're receptive and calm; Ti-subs seem to need more distinct Fe signals, and can't be gauged as often.
sub-sub quadras could make some sense, as far as clarifying stages of subtype progression, since temperament is only a general division.
Note that I said "logical aggresion", to distinguish LSE and SLE. quasi-identity. You missed the Ti categorical distinction.
LSE...
2. "All I do is done well". One more quotation: "There is a gift which is always characteristic of great baseball players and teams. This is onslaught. This is the capability to run more rapidly then one is required to, to move more quickly than one is required to, to be more impertinent than one is required to” (Ph.Brooks). Initiative is habitual to him; he is decisive, likes to be the center of attention. He defends his ideas with guts and fervor. In front of his superiors he is not shy, even becomes aggressive. He knows that business only then goes perfectly if the necessary tempo is set from the very beginning. He does not tolerate procrastination, is an ardent struggler for quality and thoroughness in all work. A good army officer. Like Thomas Edison, a representative of this type is capable of working 19.5 hours a day.
3. "Rage is a mighty god of the strong". He tends to take other people out of the condition of complacency. He does not speak much about what is good, considers it self-evident. With his grumbling emotions he strives to extinguish emotions of others. He believes that redundant emotions tire people, and this is absolutely true if applied to his dual (The Humanist). During a conversation he pressures his interlocutor, even tries to intimidate him, but if people do not fear him, he becomes courteous and polite. Fury is his line of defense in a situation of emergency in which he feels otherwise helpless. The aim of his fury is to mobilize his partner, and when this is achieved, he calms down.
I'm a little hesitant to rely on the Elena Zamanskaya descriptions, particularly because they drift from Model A, flowing more into the realm of subjective understandings on the types.
Not to say that there isn't some truth to them, but IMO it's better to go by function based descriptions, at least than it can be broken down and understood from a more objective point of view
EII INFj
Forum status: retired
"not western civilization, but the civilization itself
is the disease that is eating us
not the las five thousand years, but the last twenty thousand
are the cancer
not modern city, but the city, not
capitalism, but ism, art, religion, once they are
separate enough to be seen and named, named art named
religion, once they are not
simply the daily acts of lite which bring the rain, bring bread,
heal, bring
the herds close enough to hunt, birth the children
simply the acts of song, the acts of power, now lost
to us these many years, not killing a few white men will bring
back power, not killing all the white men, but killing
the white men in each of us, killing the desire
for brocade, for gold, for champagne brandy, which sends
people out of the sun and out of their lives to create
COMMODITY for our pleasure, what claim
do we have, can we make, on another's time, another's
life blood, show me
a city which doesn't consume the air and water
for miles around it, mohenjo-daro was a blot
on the village culture of india, the citys of Egypt sucked
the life of millions, show me
an artifact of city which has the power
a flesh has power, a spirit of man
has power"
Diane di Prima, Revolutionary letters 1971/2007
anti-Te ?
Last edited by Kalinoche buenanoche; 11-04-2010 at 03:15 PM.
Because people with strong Te are efficient and logical, and I'm not. I'm afraid of being embarrassed and reprimanded for not doing what I know I should be doing around strong Tes.
play humanist
Grumble Grumble
Now someone bring me some food.
Simply put, those who enjoy blowing bubbles are leery of those who excel at popping them.
Though the xEIs I know appreciate my ability to build/fix things, explain phenomena, and otherwise provide solutions to problems, they tend to catch a major bummer when my skeptical analysis and facts-only approach kill all the faeries and spirits they hope are at work in the world.
I knew there was a good reason why I generally stay out of tcaudillig threads.
Johari Box"Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi
Te is way too orderly and systematic to be to my taste, counting and plotting, sizing up and arming their vehicles with vengeance and stampedes on chaos. There is always something changing, something different, along with free exploration of techniques that leaves Me staggered, stunned, and stupefied by the cause and effect chain of determinism.
Chinese Fortune Cookie ~ A fair face may fade, but a beautiful soul lasts forever. Lucky Numbers - 53, 10, 29, 14, 1, 21
Mr. Mime = Mastermind
The time is alway right to do what is right.
Become who you are.
Marius Florin aka LeoSuperCluster as Raging Bolt the Raikou number 1021 and SolitaryWalker brought glory to the years of Silver and forged Pichu, wisdom of force and flair to exhibit dinosaur questing pointers electrocuting cinema and blueprints of emporiums to undertow flows jungle tossing galaxy spanning shivers of essence gems and portals of roads to destruction and arboretums folding castles and swordsmanship of dreams and counters to pleasant vibrations and holy water sprouting evanescent stars and puzzles of grades to saffron climax
https://www.the16types.info/vbulleti...k-2024-edition
I think Ti is more about causes, and Te more about consequences.
Ultimately Ti wants things to "make sense" in terms of understanding why something happened, or why it has been decided in such a way. Te thinking is more outcome-oriented. I'm having a hard time explaining it clearly enough.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
