Ti and people

[ashlesha]

this is inspired by something in a different thread, but i have decided to make an effort to curtail my off-topic posts. (we'll see how well that actually goes, but i have to be more accountable now that i've said it out loud lol.)

i was hoping for responses from Ti egos especially (but open to responses from anyone).

its about Ti expecting things to make sense and be internally consistent. i'm wondering how this operates in the realm of people..who rarely really make sense, lol. does this give Ti egos very high standards in terms of the people they choose to be around "making sense?" if someone seems inconsistent in their behavior or beliefs what is your reaction? these questions are sort of floating around the main question in my mind, which is basically...Ti + people equals ? so feel free to go off on tangents.

i think pretty much everyone expects some degree of consistency in people, so i'm having trouble finding the words here, so i guess...just assume you know what i'm saying and i"ll take what i can get from any responses, haha. :wink:

thanks.

[Computer Loser]

this is inspired by something in a different thread, but i have decided to make an effort to curtail my off-topic posts. (we'll see how well that actually goes, but i have to be more accountable now that i've said it out loud lol.)

i was hoping for responses from Ti egos especially (but open to responses from anyone).

its about Ti expecting things to make sense and be internally consistent. i'm wondering how this operates in the realm of people..who rarely really make sense, lol. does this give Ti egos very high standards in terms of the people they choose to be around "making sense?" if someone seems inconsistent in their behavior or beliefs what is your reaction? these questions are sort of floating around the main question in my mind, which is basically...Ti + people equals ? so feel free to go off on tangents.

i think pretty much everyone expects some degree of consistency in people, so i'm having trouble finding the words here, so i guess...just assume you know what i'm saying and i"ll take what i can get from any responses, haha. :wink:

thanks.

I'm not sure how to describe it...but its like I make rules and standards of how people "ought to behave."

For example, if you're a good friend, according to me, you would make an effort to go out of your way to contact me once in a while, say hi to me when you see me, be interested in me... If I suspect that any of these things are off, then I'll immediately make up things in my mind and be like, "oh this person does not care for me." and i feel like i'm really sensitive to these inconsistencies- like they immediately jump out at me.

i also think I use Ti (as the wikisocion definition mentioned) to analyze and keep track of my relationships. i do this thing on facebook where i keep in track of my friends on facebook - like whether or not they've been writing on my wall, replying to my requests, and I sum up all these factors and make determinations on our friendship lol.

yeah...so i guess you could say because of all this, i have pretty high standards for people...which is why i get disappointed/bitter often.

Im Not Ti ego, but Ti vlauening and this does bother me(when people claim to be christians for example then live their lives differently because of their human nature). It just seems hypocrtical, and it bothers me because its not in line with what people say about what they beleive. Im sure this is releted to Ti.

i agree with this

[Aiss]

I'm pretty much the opposite. I like chaos magic, i.e. the ability to suspend consistency on one level to reinforce it on another. Also inconsistency is not nearly as bad as misplaced fanaticism (idiots).

You break my hypothesis that rationality matters here.

[silverchris9]

It occurs to me that Ti-valuers can also have mercy or whatever, it's not like they're always firm and inflexible and unbending. But the difference between Ti flexibility about rules and Fi flexibility about rules is like the difference between a "curve" made up of straight line segments at different angles, and an actual smooth curve that's constantly changing direction. Second one is still harder to predict but allows for more variable response as the situation changes.

[Creepy-male]

its about Ti expecting things to make sense and be internally consistent. i'm wondering how this operates in the realm of people..who rarely really make sense, lol. does this give Ti egos very high standards in terms of the people they choose to be around "making sense?" if someone seems inconsistent in their behavior or beliefs what is your reaction? these questions are sort of floating around the main question in my mind, which is basically...Ti + people equals ? so feel free to go off on tangents.

I don't know its not really what you stereotypically think about Ti egos for me. Stereotypically you may expect Ti's to require people to fit into little logical boxes much like a mechanical machine, this is completely wrong on so many levels that I don't want to get into, mainly because it will take to long to get to the point.

Which is, that for me, I think Ti works with people in attempting to understand a person's philosophy. A person in a sense is like a "system", they have there own preferences, mannerisms, beliefs, and outlook. In other words its a subjective system (remember Ti is subjective thinking from jungs viewpoint), and not an objective system. I don't expect people to make sense to me or to make sense to society, but I expect them to have consisent believes and principles that make sense to them.

Although occasionally I run across someone who doesn't seem to have a consistent ideology, and generally I kind of have a negative outlook towards those individuals, but at the same time I feel like its just another deeper type of ideology. In a sense sometimes people's ideology is to have no ideology, or people's ideology is to be guided by sensation or emotion and not thought, and so on the surface it appears they have no ideology, but in another sense they do.

[Creepy-male]

Also in terms of quadra definitions, I think its incorrect to discuss which quadra is more forgiving and so forth.

What I would immediately turn to is DCNH, the idea that

and are linear-mobilizing functions and characteristic of the dominant subtype

and creative

and so forth

In particular consider where Ti falls... in the normalizing category, as does Fi

Alpha and Beta can be perceived as having Ti normalization

Gamma and Delta can be perceived as having Fi normalization

So I'd like to think of the contrast between Ti and non-Ti (i.e. Te types) in terms of this as a split between normalization strategies.

Alpha's and Beta's look for logically consistent (normalized) subjective philosophies

Gamma's and Delta's look for ethically consistent (normalized) subjective philosophies

This isn't to imply alpha's and beta's are tightwad logic gurus that expect everyone to be consistent and diligent -- they also have an ethical function preference but its Fe, a linear-mobilizing dominant function. So in a sense they tend to be logically normalizing and ethically mobilizing/energetic.

Contrast this with the Te/Fi combo. ethically normalizing and logically mobilizing/energetic.

In a sense Alpha/Beta is quick to emotional stimulus but subdued and calm logically, which keeps their Fe from making their personality unstable.

Gamma/Delta is quick to logical action but subdued and calm ethically, which keep their Te from making their personality unstable.

Also by subdued and calm I don't mean dispassionate emotional, I mean more stable, like there values are well networked, they may feel passionate about something but its something that's embedded in their value system.

[marooned]

I honestly don't know what I think about this. I would say that I don't have a consistent ideology or consistent principles or anything like that and don't expect others to either. I don't know "what I believe in" and part of me resents having to have all of that defined (like I should have to) while another part of me feels like I should at least know what I think (although actually not consistently... I don't think it bothers me whether or not I'm consistent in my beliefs/values or anything, especially over the course of years because if I was that stagnant it would be like my brain and all its connections are turning to crust or something... and I wouldn't want a petrified mind as I've certainly seen people who are way too set in their ways and it rather disturbs me because they can get really impaired losing their ability to look at things with perspective). But there are some things I guess that I can't negotiate on so much like torturing kittens (j/k) or killing people or nuking the planet... but the point is that still it ends up being based on particular circumstances often so it's always hypothetical. I don't feel I should have to live by a "code" or something though and I feel unable to live up to the codes of others (and confined by them) and I've usually disliked set standards about behavior (rules about how to behave) as I also find this confining (and even dehumanizing)... the only thing that matters is if someone's behavior is limiting the freedom of someone else's (there is to some extent a balancing act trying to maintain it so we all have our rights where there aren't say a few people over-running everything and making everyone else's lives miserable which is where notions of power and boundaries come in). It's mainly that I feel people need the freedom to pursue what they want and be who they want (the feeling of being free and not boxed in--but where it's legit and not imagined as in you really are free). And we're piles of matter and goo so there just can't be anything consistent in that. The years change people and sometimes dramatically. I guess that I generally wish I could find something though in myself that I could say "this is me" to. I think I'm kind of surprised by some of the stuff being associated with Ti though (I'm skeptical).

I guess to be more specific I've felt hurt by people having some important rule that must be followed no matter what that's clearly more important than we are and so it always comes first... this makes me feel like the other person doesn't really care about me because their lame rules are far more precious to them so I kind of just don't want to be around them as much. It could also pertain to both Fi and Ti and I find that Fi and Ti dominants seem to be the most likely to try to correct everyone's behaviors as though one just simply can't be "perfect" enough for them and I naturally kind of resent this because of course I'm not perfect. Edit: I just realized how "accusatory" this seems and I don't actually mean it that way... it was more trying to place something not say all Ti and Fi leading people have sticks shoved up their asses as that is not at all what I meant. I also don't even really know if I resent it and also this is unfair because some people are more into correcting people's behaviors than others and I'm not even saying there's something wrong with that. In fact I might sometimes even agree maybe depending.

[07490]

I honestly don't know what I think about this. I would say that I don't have a consistent ideology or consistent principles or anything like that and don't expect others to either. I don't know "what I believe in" and part of me resents having to have all of that defined (like I should have to) while another part of me feels like I should at least know what I think (although actually not consistently... I don't think it bothers me whether or not I'm consistent in my beliefs/values or anything, especially over the course of years because if I was that stagnant it would be like my brain and all its connections are turning to crust or something... and I wouldn't want a petrified mind as I've certainly seen people who are way too set in their ways and it rather disturbs me because they can get really impaired losing their ability to look at things with perspective). But there are some things I guess that I can't negotiate on so much like torturing kittens (j/k) or killing people or nuking the planet... but the point is that still it ends up being based on particular circumstances often so it's always hypothetical. I don't feel I should have to live by a "code" or something though and I feel unable to live up to the codes of others (and confined by them) and I've usually disliked set standards about behavior (rules about how to behave) as I also find this confining. It's mainly that I feel people need the freedom to be themselves. And we're piles of matter and goo so there just can't be anything consistent in that. The years change people and sometimes dramatically. I guess that I generally wish I could find something though in myself that I could say "this is me" to. I think I'm kind of surprised by some of the stuff being associated with Ti though (I'm skeptical).

your post is always full of jumbo

[marooned]

your post is always full of jumbo

yes i know you think i'm LSI...

[Creepy-male]

I don't think it bothers me whether or not I'm consistent in my beliefs/values or anything, especially over the course of years because if I was that stagnant it would be like my brain and all its connections are turning to crust or something... and I wouldn't want a petrified mind as I've certainly seen people who are way too set in their ways and it rather disturbs me because they can get really impaired losing their ability to look at things with perspective).

I don't really think having an ideological viewpoint necessary implies a lack of perspective, I mean part of it is relativity. Having a frame of reference that is your own doesn't necessarily imply that you are incapable of understanding a different frame of reference. However it does require the ability to transform or translate a foreign reference frame to your own and vice versa. I mean honestly everyone has a reference frame, and denying this can lead to self-doubt and confusion. The goal shouldn't be to become someone else, the goal should be to understand someone else, understand yourself, and understand the relationship between you.

Anyways what I am saying is everyone has a frame of reference, Ti isn't related in my opinion to having that frame of reference, but a logical understanding of that as a system. Other types may simply be unaware of that framework and prefer not to investigate such things, they are also not bothered much by there inconsistency, where as Ti's may feel a need to make sense of inconsistencies.

[marooned]

I don't really think having an ideological viewpoint necessary implies a lack of perspective, I mean part of it is relativity. Having a frame of reference that is your own doesn't necessarily imply that you are incapable of understanding a different frame of reference. However it does require the ability to transform or translate a foreign reference frame to your own and vice versa. I mean honestly everyone has a reference frame, and denying this can lead to self-doubt and confusion. The goal shouldn't be to become someone else, the goal should be to understand someone else, understand yourself, and understand the relationship between you.

Anyways what I am saying is everyone has a frame of reference, Ti isn't related in my opinion to having that frame of reference, but a logical understanding of that as a system. Other types may simply be unaware of that framework and prefer not to investigate such things, they are also not bothered much by there inconsistency, where as Ti's may feel a need to make sense of inconsistencies.

hmm, although i kind of slurred it concept-wise by bringing up people set in their ways, i think the comments about the petrified mind were more my imagining how it would feel to me. i feel often caught up between wanting definition and fearing definition where i don't seem to be okay with either. in terms of having a frame of reference it's the same... it would be nice because it would be an origin point for myself (an essence i can identify that is me), but then i've closed off other things at the same time and so i've fixed myself more than i was before and the more fixed i become the more likely to lose perspective i am... so i want to have my cake and eat it too which just isn't possible.

also i was kind of reacting to this kind of thing

I don't expect people to make sense to me or to make sense to society, but I expect them to have consisent believes and principles that make sense to them.

which is kind of echoed throughout this thread (so not just you specifically) and i'm wondering if this really is some commonality among Ti valuers as my mind tells me "no way" for some reason (as in for some reason i feel surprised by this despite having heard it before since i am a "forum ent" and all cough). i mean i do have some sense of admiration for people who know who they are and what they're all about whose actions seem to flow clearly from this, but i don't really know how to reconcile this with myself and the notion of being more of myself. i've also been thinking a lot about how people just seem to solidify more and more with years and how it's actually kind of disturbing (to me).

[Aiss]

I honestly don't know what I think about this. I would say that I don't have a consistent ideology or consistent principles or anything like that and don't expect others to either. I don't know "what I believe in" and part of me resents having to have all of that defined (like I should have to) while another part of me feels like I should at least know what I think (although actually not consistently... I don't think it bothers me whether or not I'm consistent in my beliefs/values or anything, especially over the course of years because if I was that stagnant it would be like my brain and all its connections are turning to crust or something... and I wouldn't want a petrified mind as I've certainly seen people who are way too set in their ways and it rather disturbs me because they can get really impaired losing their ability to look at things with perspective). But there are some things I guess that I can't negotiate on so much like torturing kittens (j/k) or killing people or nuking the planet... but the point is that still it ends up being based on particular circumstances often so it's always hypothetical. I don't feel I should have to live by a "code" or something though and I feel unable to live up to the codes of others (and confined by them) and I've usually disliked set standards about behavior (rules about how to behave) as I also find this confining (and even dehumanizing)... the only thing that matters is if someone's behavior is limiting the freedom of someone else's (there is to some extent a balancing act trying to maintain it so we all have our rights where there aren't say a few people over-running everything and making everyone else's lives miserable which is where notions of power and boundaries come in). It's mainly that I feel people need the freedom to pursue what they want and be who they want (the feeling of being free and not boxed in--but where it's legit and not imagined as in you really are free). And we're piles of matter and goo so there just can't be anything consistent in that. The years change people and sometimes dramatically. I guess that I generally wish I could find something though in myself that I could say "this is me" to. I think I'm kind of surprised by some of the stuff being associated with Ti though (I'm skeptical).

I guess to be more specific I've felt hurt by people having some important rule that must be followed no matter what that's clearly more important than we are and so it always comes first... this makes me feel like the other person doesn't really care about me because their lame rules are far more precious to them so I kind of just don't want to be around them as much. It could also pertain to both Fi and Ti and I find that Fi and Ti dominants seem to be the most likely to try to correct everyone's behaviors as though one just simply can't be "perfect" enough for them and I naturally kind of resent this because of course I'm not perfect.

I could have written the same. Except of course I'm biased against Ti so I tend to associate all this trying of making the rules explicit with it. And I rather wonder that no Ti-ego denied it yet, considering there are no lack of them here.

[squark]

I could have written the same. Except of course I'm biased against Ti so I tend to associate all this trying of making the rules explicit with it. And I rather wonder that no Ti-ego denied it yet, considering there are no lack of them here.

I love it when I post something and it gets totally ignored.

[silverchris9]

DCNH-y post

+10. That's actually probably a better way of looking at it than the way I was saying. More nuanced, more accurate. I mean, I think it is accurate to say that Beta Ti tends to be more absolute in allowing fewer deviations from the principle as a whole, but in individual instances individuals from any quadra can be equally severe, so talking about it in terms of forgiving or whatever is definitely less helpful than what you were saying.

The Ji element is more controlled and rational, the Je element is more motion oriented. So Fe gets the motion started emotionally, but then there's this ethical thing to come in a ground it. Most easily seen in the rational dyads of both Fe/Ti quadras: ESEs get all wound up about something and take immediate emotional action in the moment, which is sometimes necessary. But when they overreact, you have Ti to fall back on, to give some structure to all that motion, something more considered. Even if the decision in the moment is sharp and absolute, the system undergirding it is thoughtful, careful, "well-networked" as you said. Nice. Same with EIEs---go off on some emotional tangent (THIS IS SHE! THIS IS SHE! ~Mercutio is SLE, but that sort of thing), and LSI calms them down with a solid grounding in reality: Peace, Mercutio, thou talk'st of nothing. Hmmm... maybe Mercutio is EIE... that might fit better than SLE...

And then in the Fi/Te quadras, you have LIEs rushing around always having something to fix or improve logically, just as ESEs always have something to improve emotionally, something to improve in their social atmosphere. Note that the task performed might be the exact same task, but the LIE will perform it to improve the quality I suppose, to make it more streamlined, more logical, more intelligent; whereas the ESE will perform the task in order to affect the intangibles of his/her environment. So LIE and ESE might both hang up a picture a certain way, for instance. But LIE will make sure the picture is hanging straight for explicit reason: this is at a certain angle, this angle is correct and it will bother me if it's wrong; ESE will make sure the picture is hanging straight for an implicit reason: gosh, that angle is just not quite right, and every time I look at it, it just bugs me. Lemme go fix that so that the room feels right (note the Si + Fe, focus on the physical aspects contributing to comfort and sort of positive motion in the room).

But then, LIE has the Fi to come in and give a more considered response when LIE is focusing too much more on making things correct, making things correspond to the established facts (whatever those established facts may be, such as, a picture frame ought to hang at a ninety degree angle or whatever). And the less in-the-moment, more considered concept is: yeah, but leave that alone because there's something more important going on right now, our daughter is crying (or whatever). There's something that needs your attention relating to your close relationships, or even relating to an acquaintance that you're hurting. Don't correct how EIE Johnny hung the picture while he's around; he did that because it felt "artistic" to him. You can fix it when he's not around, as a kindness to him. The Ji element takes the things that Je reacts to in the moment (Je = object dynamics) and puts them into a larger, more stable context (Ji = field statics): relating the object that should be moved (the picture EIE Johnny hung incorrectly) to a larger context (how the picture relates to Johnny and how Johnny relates to LIE and how LIE relates to Fi-ego, etc.)

That's a good way to think about it. Hope you didn't mind my thinking out loud on the subject. You think that's accurate-ish?

[Creepy-male]

The Ji element takes the things that Je reacts to in the moment (Je = object dynamics) and puts them into a larger, more stable context (Ji = field statics): relating the object that should be moved (the picture EIE Johnny hung incorrectly) to a larger context (how the picture relates to Johnny and how Johnny relates to LIE and how LIE relates to Fi-ego, etc.)

Yea that's useful as well, relating Je/Ji to object dynamics and field statics. I think that's another way to look at it also, and you can also use this to explain DCNH in a way.

Also I think that object/dynamics/field/statics are terms which come from physics. For example you have dynamics and statics in physics. Dynamics is the study of things in motion, being acted on by forces (like a satellite soaring through orbit). Statics is the study of things at rest, maybe they are acted on by forces but they remain at rest, in static equilibrium (like a bridge supporting a load). Then you have fields... like gravitational fields or electric fields or magnetic fields.

Anyways in a sense Ji - field statics is like an electric field which remains unchanging, something like this.



a vector field, but the arrows point consistently in the same direction they do not vary they are static.

And in a sense Je - object dynamics are like a charged particle places in this field.. for example



the green being the path of the particle, its trajectory, its dynamics, the dynamics of the object.

Now to return to socionics, in a way Ji/Je work together like this, the rational judgments that people make are mobilized by the Je function but fit within a Ji framework. In the same way a particle is mobilized in a field.

The Alpha/Beta judgment system (Ji/Je functions) works by perceiving the static field as Ti and the object dynamics as Fe.

The Gamma/Delta judgment system works by perceiving the static field as Fi and the object dynamics as Te.

Further Ti and Te are the same thing as are Fi and Fe, but they correlate to two separate perspectives or styles. Logic is the same whether you decide to view it as a set of discrete facts or as part of structured theory. Ethics are the same whether they take of the Fe or Fi perspective also -- love, hate, jealousy, anger, are all human emotion.

So basically the Ji/Je judgment system pairing creates two different styles of rational perception. The Pi/Pe perceptual system pairing is also interesting, it's divided as Alpha/Delta and Beta/Gamma. If you can select a judgment system pairing and a perceptual system pairing you end up with a quadra.

That's a good way to think about it. Hope you didn't mind my thinking out loud on the subject.

No it actually helps solidify the theory, somethings you said better, or somethings sparked my interest in it again.

You think that's accurate-ish?

Of course, but I'm bias to my own idea, but in so far as that's concerned I think you caught the idea pretty well and even said somethings in a clearer way.

[silverchris9]

Oh, I quite like that field/particle analogy. The field itself is stable (although it can change if conditions change), but the particle in the field is constantly moving. And the trajectory of the particle can be affected by another object, that is, you can apply object dynamics to the particle (make the particle move). But it's still moving within the sphere of influence of the static field. So the static field can't perfectly predict exactly how the particle will change. But neither can a focus only on the particle and the objects impacting it tell you how the particle will change. You need information both about the particle and its velocity, size, charge, etc. (which is constantly changing), and about the field in which it is operating (which is relatively stable). Gamma/Delta = logical particle in an ethical field; Alpha/Beta = ethical particle in a logical field.

Any thoughts on how to correlate the DCNH stuff with Pe/Pi? Like Alpha/Delta create with intuition/abstractly and harmonize on a more practical, concrete basis. But what does "harmonizing" mean in this situation?

[nala]

What I noticed is that an introverted function is like holding that essense, that particular ideal inside your head. This makes the person apt to point out the lack of thereof in the environment. For example, a Ti dominant will be very good at pointing out the lack of Ti in surroundings and people around. A Ni dominant might come to reprimand the world around for beeing too shallow and materialistic seeing lack of N everywhere. This is probably what you mean by "consistency" - consistently expecting to see high degree of your dominant function everywhere. Introverted function is a point where the person expects the world outside to adapt to them rather than adapting to the world.

The next criteria where the person doesn't want to adapt but would rather piont lack of thereof is the second introverted function. For LIIs this is Si - consistency in actions and looks and sensory preferences to what LII comes to expect. Whereas for LSIs this is Ni - they desire to see a certain grounded-ness in conceptual realm, consistency of believes.

I've been reading on relations of benefit recently as I'm dating an LII and I've noticed each of us has moments of being confused with the other person. I've noticed I confuse him whenever I exercise my Se. For example we were meeting at 2pm every other day throughout the workweek at a certain spot. But I felt the need to introduce some variety to my schedule. We both had some free time between classes at 10am so I asked to meet then and asked that we switch location. After some time I felt the need to break this schedule again and asked to go back to 2pm but keep the location where we were meeting. I liked the higher level of activity there, but he complained saying it made him feel unnerved and he had trouble concentrating there. My feeling was that while he was going along with it he was thoroughly confused by this behavior from me. At the same time he continues confusing me with his Ne. He just sometimes says quirky weird things that take me aback. Sometimes I am in the mood to follow them through, sometimes it makes me grow silent because I'm just not sure how to react. In essence I expect Ni out of him and he expects Si out of me.

[07490]

What I noticed is that an introverted function is like holding that essense, that particular ideal inside your head. This makes the person apt to point out the lack of thereof in the environment. For example, a Ti dominant will be very good at pointing out the lack of Ti in surroundings and people around. A Ni dominant might come to reprimand the world around for beeing too shallow and materialistic seeing lack of N everywhere. This is probably what you mean by "consistency" - consistently expecting to see high degree of your dominant function everywhere. Introverted function is a point where the person expects the world outside to adapt to them rather than adapting to the world.

This is interesting, I am a extrovert by socionics :based and I usually noticed / first thing in the social arena. My first function is not introvert though.

The next criteria where the person doesn't want to adapt but would rather piont lack of thereof is the second introverted function. For LIIs this is Si - consistency in actions and looks and sensory preferences to what LII comes to expect. Whereas for LSIs this is Ni - they desire to see a certain grounded-ness in conceptual realm, consistency of believes.

Yea I agree, and I think it goes universal maybe? even for extrovert type

I've been reading on relations of benefit recently as I'm dating an LII and I've noticed each of us has moments of being confused with the other person. I've noticed I confuse him whenever I exercise my Se. For example we were meeting at 2pm every other day throughout the workweek at a certain spot. But I felt the need to introduce some variety to my schedule. We both had some free time between classes at 10am so I asked to meet then and asked that we switch location. After some time I felt the need to break this schedule again and asked to go back to 2pm but keep the location where we were meeting. I liked the higher level of activity there, but he complained saying it made him feel unnerved and he had trouble concentrating there. My feeling was that while he was going along with it he was thoroughly confused by this behavior from me. At the same time he continues confusing me with his Ne. He just sometimes says quirky weird things that take me aback. Sometimes I am in the mood to follow them through, sometimes it makes me grow silent because I'm just not sure how to react. In essence I expect Ni out of him and he expects Si out of me.

Funny I would think that I might look at their Ne differently the way you do, but thinking twice I feel that I look at their Ne the same way you do with your boyfriend, since you guys would have a benefit relationship. But I expect myself to engage along with LII's longer than your would, until fundamental differences in base /Ti: clashes that's backed by differences in sensing/intuition. the differences is not usually quite noticeable until it's working together and agenda comes full forth. playtime/flirting/cheap-talk is alright. where as you and your boyfriend which is a benefit relationship, happens for you to ignore Ne, you not being very receptive towards his producing function. conversing what you produce is dual-seeking for him and is naturally accepting for him. he produces back and then you ignore and etc... goes in cycle. I tend to be more open to LII's Ne idea until I see for myself through that it isn't necessary and would express it's idea through Se, and that's when it clashes for us.


You do give a good example about how an introvert would look at their outer environment and see inconsistency based on their dominant function. it's not the case though as least for me, maybe it's an extrovert thing or maybe it's an sensing/intuition thing.

[Aiss]

Um... so, your post says it's either movements imply paths or paths imply movements. Yeah, that's a good way of looking at it too I guess. I like the particle/field analogy because it emphasizes the necessity of knowing both sides (the Je/particle side and the Ji/field side) in order to get a complete pictures; hence, complementary functions. If you're just deducing one from the other, it implies that the explicit thing (from which the implicit one is derived) is more important. If movements imply paths then it seems that the paths are secondary, derived knowledge, rather than objects of knowledge in their own right that complement the explicit knowledge.

Yeah, well, it's just another analogy as far as I'm concerned. I mean no offense, but I really don't think any is going to be perfect, and I was trying to say "imagine it however it works for you", to convey the idea of the interaction rather than any specific picture. The implied part isn't explicitly deduced, it's rather about interpretation. It's all about how you choose to look at it.

I realized by comments in that thread that I wasn't clear enough about what I meant by implication. I don't see it as simply "deductive" or one having an advantage over the other. The thing is, if you can deduce something explicitly, it isn't the same as implicit socionics information. For example Ti is supposed to be very good at explicit deduction but such deduction isn't everything, and I don't expect Fe-egos get their Fe information this way. But what you said once or twice of LSI's tendency to interpret action according to their picture of the world (or at least that's how I understood this) fits in with it pretty well; they consciously focus on the principles (Ti) while attempting to interpret action (Fe). They're better at seeing explicit (Te) part of the action than interpreting it, but it's the latter they strive for to complete the picture.

If an implicit element is weak and unconscious, the person might be very aware of explicit aspects but not sure how they lead to implicit ones, possibly trying to deduce them as you describe (?). If an explicit element is weak and unconscious, the person might be very aware of what it implies (their matching ego function), but often unaware of what caused it. Such as Ne-egos getting ideas seemingly out of nowhere while it's an immediate perspective (Si) that puts so far hidden qualities to light (Ne). Or Ni-egos getting an idea of how things will proceed without conscious awareness of all the variables (Se).

They complement each other in types because explicit input stimulates implicit ego and implicit input in turn stimulates explicit ego (such as Se-dots help form Ni-picture which helps predict and find more relevant Se-dots and so on). It's symmetrical this way, a feedback loop.

I'm not sure yet how abstracting involved information would affect this picture, so maybe it's a bad time to explain it, but I think it plays a part.

Also I'm not really clear on if your post is a commentary on mine or a refutation or what? Like, how are those two quotes supposed to be in conversation?

It's sort of "I'm glad you finally start to see it *sigh*" whining. Don't mind it too much. :wink:

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

To the OP:

At first my post was angry, then I edited.

I kinda know what you mean personally. My intj dad is like this. He wants things to be so internally consistent that he got a stroke because he couldn't flow with the natural rhythms in life. It's a bit more complicated than that, but that's what it boils down to. And like Dolphin said, it just made him brittle and weak.

He didn't really want to be saved or 'better himself' in that way though. More like he didn't think it was really an issue, and knew that another female/esfj-ish caregiving woman would always be around to cover up his weaknesses. To other people it was such a glaring, obvious annoying weakness. Like 'can't you just take better care of yourself physically man. Can't you just exert and PUSH! and stay with the natural rhytmic flow of the universe?'

You wanted to bully and shake him back into alignment. But it just wasn't happening. He was way too stubborn and sensitive and so I just sighed and went along with it. But then everybody is really neurotic and defensive/stubborn about their weaknesses so I can't really hate him for it any longer. They want that shit to be awwed and cooed and babied and protected and made sweet love to and say 'okay there there you can just self-destruct I will take care of it all for you.'

I don't know. It's frustrating. To an outsider non-dual perspective it really makes you angry. You don't really understand their weaknesses and foibles and you don't find them cute at all. You only sociopathically try to get under their skin and make them change because it bugs you. You don't want to baby them like an esfj would. You want them to man up and stop being so brittle intj-like. But he does the same goddamn fucking thing to me. I think you're just venting about somebody else's bullshit. Which is natural/understandable. I'd avoid saying it to their face though. Really. No way can you do that and not be the bad guy or start this huge arguement.

[Slacker]

What I've noticed with LSIs I've worked with, is that they expect you to do things in a consistent and logical manner. People are not consistent and they know that, but I think that's why the LSIs I've known like keeping lists and charts, to keep people, who are naturally incosistent, doing things in a consistent manner. And so long as I would follow their lists of how they wanted things done, they'd be happy working with me.

[ashlesha]

What I've noticed with LSIs I've worked with, is that they expect you to do things in a consistent and logical manner. People are not consistent and they know that, but I think that's why the LSIs I've known like keeping lists and charts, to keep people, who are naturally incosistent, doing things in a consistent manner. And so long as I would follow their lists of how they wanted things done, they'd be happy working with me.

thanks. i guess i would interpret this as: they dont necessarily expect people to be consistent but they help them to be more so?

[Slacker]

That's how it works regardless of the specific function. We don't expect others to be strong in our strong functions, but we expect them to value the same things we value. So for an LSI, they don't expect others to be strong it Ti as well (which is just as well because their duals aren't) but they expect that they want to be stronger at it so they set things up to help with it. It's when someone doesn't value it and doesn't want that help that they can get irritated, just like you could if someone didn't care about Fi. You're happy to help someone with it, but if someone said, "Why should I bother with that. That isn't important." you might get irritated.

Also, I think expecting people who call themselves Christians to generally behave in a way that follows the ethical example of Jesus' life sounds more like an Fi concern, and expecting people who call themselves Christians to follow or do a specific list or things that are logically consistent with being Christian might be more Ti. Though that might be splitting hairs.

[ashlesha]

thinking about it further. people are contradictory. like i think what threw me off with ashton's post is because it struck this sensitive spot: do i know who i am? and i think i know who i am mostly when its rubbed against other people or things...i know what resonates, what chafes, what falls flat. and sometimes a similar kind of idea can resonate at one time or chafe another time because of how its presented or where i'm at at the time. i dont know if i'm typical or not. but i know that i usually dont make much sense. finding the constants and the ironclads is a constant struggle and i feel like i'm always in flux. is this inconsistent with both Fi and Ti as both aim for consistency in a way?

yet another thread where i just end up talking about myself. and probably stretching concepts out into pointlessness, lol. i think i just need to go get drunk or something. sigh.

[Aiss]

Ti + people equals ?

Socionics intertype relations system?

I've first heard the suggestion as a joke but it makes a lot of sense - within socionics - that such a highly theoretical, complex yet clear and very idealized system covering information usually matched with Fi would be created by Fi-PoLR/Ti-creative. That is not to say clear socionics-like categories are exactly how Ti-egos deal with particular relations in real life, but there might be something to it on a more general level.

There's consistency and there's consistency. I tend to agree with Mariella that Ti flavour is more overt or explicit, "code of conduct" like, though of course few people in general would have it clearly defined anyway. Fi is often associated with morality, but I'd say this analogy only works if we represent Ti as law for comparison.

[717495]

i think i just need to go get drunk or something. sigh.

No.

I personally am not very consistent, and I don't care about people being consistent. I'm not really anti-anything, people should be who they want to be, even if they're inconsistent, and not be judged all the time.

[squark]

thinking about it further. people are contradictory. like i think what threw me off with ashton's post is because it struck this sensitive spot: do i know who i am? and i think i know who i am mostly when its rubbed against other people or things...i know what resonates, what chafes, what falls flat. and sometimes a similar kind of idea can resonate at one time or chafe another time because of how its presented or where i'm at at the time. i dont know if i'm typical or not. but i know that i usually dont make much sense. finding the constants and the ironclads is a constant struggle and i feel like i'm always in flux. is this inconsistent with both Fi and Ti as both aim for consistency in a way?

yet another thread where i just end up talking about myself. and probably stretching concepts out into pointlessness, lol. i think i just need to go get drunk or something. sigh.

Ah, seems like people are answering a bunch of different questions here, all based on your initial inquiry, so I'll just answer the one I feel like answering too, even if it's not quite what you're asking.

People are people, and sure I get annoyed by minor things here and there, but total rigidity in thought and action is definitely much harder to deal with in other people than a little wavering. Also, I can get locked into ways of thinking, or decisions, and sometimes it's someone else's doubts and inconsistencies that shakes me loose and makes me re-evaluate something. A little flexibility is not a bad thing.

I also identify with what peteronfireee wrote, where I'll think that because someone did or didn't do something that it means something in particular. It ends up just making me feel bad a whole lot, and I've found that it's a lot better to not take anything personally. Sure, it's very difficult to not know where you stand with anyone, but I didn't really know that before either, I just assumed I did. I don't like having to keep everyone on this sort of shallow acquaintance level, assuming nothing either way. In fact, I hate it. But what else can I do? Drive myself crazy evaluating actions? I wish there was an easy way to tell these kinds of things. Unless someone says I LOVE YOU or You suck! GO AWAY! it's sort of hard to tell what they think.

[marooned]

thinking about it further. people are contradictory. like i think what threw me off with ashton's post is because it struck this sensitive spot: do i know who i am? and i think i know who i am mostly when its rubbed against other people or things...i know what resonates, what chafes, what falls flat. and sometimes a similar kind of idea can resonate at one time or chafe another time because of how its presented or where i'm at at the time.

i relate to this. i had written something longer but i just deleted it.

[silverchris9]

Also, I think expecting people who call themselves Christians to generally behave in a way that follows the ethical example of Jesus' life sounds more like an Fi concern, and expecting people who call themselves Christians to follow or do a specific list or things that are logically consistent with being Christian might be more Ti. Though that might be splitting hairs.

Yeah. Ti morality will often be more... deductive almost? As in, "you say you're a Christian, but your action x is in direct contradiction with verse/principle y. How are you going to reconcile that?" Whereas I imagine with Fi it's less about book chapter and verse and more about this resonated well or poorly with me, and was therefore considerate/inconsiderate, thoughtful/careless, kind/unkind, etc.

thinking about it further. people are contradictory. like i think what threw me off with ashton's post is because it struck this sensitive spot: do i know who i am? and i think i know who i am mostly when its rubbed against other people or things...i know what resonates, what chafes, what falls flat. and sometimes a similar kind of idea can resonate at one time or chafe another time because of how its presented or where i'm at at the time. i dont know if i'm typical or not. but i know that i usually dont make much sense. finding the constants and the ironclads is a constant struggle and i feel like i'm always in flux. is this inconsistent with both Fi and Ti as both aim for consistency in a way?

Ti and Fi are both statics of fields, so yes, they aim for unchanging relations between objects. For Ti this is explicit, and exemplified in the rules of logic: the relationship between a and a will always in all cases no matter what be such that a is a. If a and b are different objects, it will always be such that a is not b (and b is not a). And furthermore, it will always be such that if a is b and b is c, then a is c. And so on and so forth.

Fi aims for the same thing, but in an implicit, cloudy manner. So you probably have an unchanging, yet indefinable, set of expectations, just as Ti people emphasize the unchanging aspects of relations between things.

(Like the lists you were talking about. I am always reminded of how my dad wanted to make procedure lists for everything at work, so that no matter who was operating the equipment---he works in TV---they could look at the procedure list and find the exact thing they needed to do to achieve the exact result they wanted. Wonderful for Beta NFs, not so wonderful for Fi-valuers, especially deltas.)

So even though how you feel about something may change based on any number of variables (so many that you could never articulate exactly why something makes you feel a certain way, beyond metaphors and a few clear things like, "murder is just wrong!" especially if you were pressed by a Ti type to prove that you can derive that reaction from a mutually agreed-upon principle), you probably have pretty clear reactions in a given situation that ultimately relate to certain unchanging rules, even if a combination of setting change and (given that Ne is your creative function) imagining the possibilities for the variables about the situation that you don't know, might make it difficult for you to say anything about a given situation beyond your gut feeling about whether it's right or wrong or to be embraced or to be avoided, etc.

I'm not sure how to describe it...but its like I make rules and standards of how people "ought to behave."

For example, if you're a good friend, according to me, you would make an effort to go out of your way to contact me once in a while, say hi to me when you see me, be interested in me... If I suspect that any of these things are off, then I'll immediately make up things in my mind and be like, "oh this person does not care for me." and i feel like i'm really sensitive to these inconsistencies- like they immediately jump out at me.

i also think I use Ti (as the wikisocion definition mentioned) to analyze and keep track of my relationships. i do this thing on facebook where i keep in track of my friends on facebook - like whether or not they've been writing on my wall, replying to my requests, and I sum up all these factors and make determinations on our friendship lol.

yeah...so i guess you could say because of all this, i have pretty high standards for people...which is why i get disappointed/bitter often.

Good examples I think. Both Ti and Fi create rules and expectations for how other people ought to behave. But (Beta) Ti has very explicit and external rules, like the ones you listed, which is why they need Beta NFs to come in and say, "no, that person really likes you." "B-but he did x, y, and z!" "Yeah, but he really likes you. Just trust me. God... you never listen to me about anything! I always try to tell you things and you just tell me I'm wrong, like I'm always wrong, like it's always my fault..." (EIE proceeds to emotionally beat LSI into submission). Kidding about the emotional beating (maybe), but that's the idea: Beta NF uses magical emotional intuition to correct the expectations about people you get from a purely "checklist" style of relationship evaluation.

And Beta NFs like those explicit rules. It gives you something to live up to, and you know what it is. On the other hand, Fi has all the implicit rules, and you never really know if you've tripped up or if you've done it right. And mysteriously, all the people in a group seem to know these implicit rules, so if you do something against them (the rules), rather than one person complaining, it will generally be an entire group (this is more to do with archetypal Delta aristocracy) that will subtly reject you for failing to follow the invisible standards. This drives betas insane.

Delta STs, on the other hand, presumably like these implicit rules for conduct. They get everybody pointed in the same direction without any need for big emotional conflict or "you broke the rules, now face the punishment" drama. It's more flexible and forgiving.

So, Delta Fi = more flexible and forgiving, but you never really know if what you did is right or wrong (or rather, if you know, you know; and if you don't, you don't.)
Beta Ti = not flexible or forgiving, but you always know exactly where you stand.

Both, of course, have their excesses corrected (or at least mitigated) by the complementary function.

And there's something with alphas and gammas but I don't get them so whatevs.

[Creepy-female]

lots of good words

So, Delta Fi = more flexible and forgiving, but you never really know if what you did is right or wrong (or rather, if you know, you know; and if you don't, you don't.)
Beta Ti = not flexible or forgiving, but you always know exactly where you stand.

I liked this. My experience is that I find myself more in tune with the implicits automatically.

[ashlesha]

Consistent in what sense? Because I definitely expect people to be consistent in the sense of being self-aware and having well-formed character. To know who they are, what they want, what they value, what they believe, what ideals are worthy of living, fighting, and dying for. If you don't have that, then you don't exist as a coherent person IMO.

damnit, this is the kind of response i figured i'd get since i couldnt figure out how to articulate my question well.

i guess i was thinking something like - fuck, idk. god i dont know how to reply to stuff like this KNOW WHATS WORTH DYING FOR OR YOU DONT EXIST RAH RAH stuff, lol. the whole tone of this sort of thing distracts me and throws me off.

i guess its like how i was thinking about just today how most people i know refer to themselves as christians but dont actively practice or live their lives that way. and this could be seen as inconsistent but its not something i feel a reaction against bc it seems like human nature. but now that ive used this as an example it seems NTR as i'm sure plenty of Fi types find it disconcerting. hmm, things seem more clear to me when i make myself think more concretely with examples, haha.

[Ave]

i guess its like how i was thinking about just today how most people i know refer to themselves as christians but dont actively practice or live their lives that way. and this could be seen as inconsistent but its not something i feel a reaction against bc it seems like human nature. but now that ive used this as an example it seems NTR as i'm sure plenty of Fi types find it disconcerting. hmm, things seem more clear to me when i make myself think more concretely with examples, haha.

Im Not Ti ego, but Ti vlauening and this does bother me(when people claim to be christians for example then live their lives differently because of their human nature). It just seems hypocrtical, and it bothers me because its not in line with what people say about what they beleive. Im sure this is releted to Ti.