What do you think of these new names for Ti and Te?

[WVBRY]

Logic of laws
Logic of circumstance


I think the first one is good, but Im not sure about the second one. I think "logic of circumstance" is applicable to ISTPs and INTPs but Im not sure if an ENTJ or ESTJ would agree with it.

Either way, I think these are better names then the ones currently used, what do you guys think?

[Slava]

I would call Linear logic, since it is based on a linear progression of cause and effect. I would call Fractal logic, since it is able to see that many small things make up larger things that can be logically manipulated. for example... (a + b) * (a + b) would be broken down into two objects being multiplied... x * x and then made into 2x ... then the x would be substituted by 2 (a + b) ... and this would be done on any level of substitution by .

[Slava]

Btw: this is why people are so good with circular definitions and just plain deffinitions in general, while people preffer a model of how to generate the outcome in order to spot it or understand it.... (ie. in a math class a person might ask, how can i graph a circle, while a person might ask, how do you define a circle.)

[Tanzhe]

Could someone please tell me about the updated definitions of Ti and Te, Ive been away for a while?

[indigoroom]

[Tanzhe]

Sorry, what I meant was that you point me to the topic explaining all of this, I cant find it.

[discourse]

Pleace, guys, do not do this or elsse I become to doubt on my type as the stuff applied to makes a lot of sence.

[indigoroom]

[science as magic]

Also the Te type was defined as the "law" person by Jung so I don't like it as the description for .

I thought we came up with good names already?

Dialectical for and Structural or whatever for .

[WVBRY]

I wasnt aware these were the names for it now. But I like dailectical( I think I came up with that) but structural logic im not sure about because Im pretty sure my is good at understanding structures.

: Were just giving them new names were not changing what was written about the funtions, just the name.

I think these names are extremely subjective in the sense that one name can be legitimate to person A(because they see the function from a certain perspective) but person B sees another aspect of it, which person A sees as applying to the other half of the funtion. Thats my impression at least. I think we could go on all night about the functions, because theres so much you can say since the information obtained by the functions pertains to every area of human life.

I also like what Slava said alot. What do you guys think about linear vs fractal logic? Not bad, but some people might not understand without an explanation. But its not like we understand the names "business logic" and "logic of correlation" anyways, or else we wouldnt be having big debates about it.

[science as magic]

I think it's hard for people without the math basis to get the gist of fractal also I dislike linear... I don't think linearly but I do think in a cause/effect way:

00010000100001000101001000100
00101001010010101010010101010
01010110101101010101101010101
1000000000000100000000000001
01000010000010000100010001001
10101000011110000000100011111

[Slava]

By linear I mean, chains of cause and effect... so this could be structure not as a simple line but a euler tree for example. (but i think thats if you use intuition of potentials with it, because then rather than a line you have branches)

[Lee]

Tie and tea

[science as magic]

I understand Slava but that's not what people reading it would connote (at least I wouldn't at first until I saw this thread). I think they would think something like a "one track mind."