Quote Originally Posted by myresearch View Post
Everyone can say anything to describe themselves, I think that's why it is important to see how did they say it. Your sentences are built in Ti fashion, they are logically correct, consistent rather than giving factual information. I actually didn't see you giving factual information just to sake of giving factual information, however, of course you used Te for the sake of Ti and this is how a person uses their ignoring function.

Each IE comes up with different intonation, you can analyze them according to +/- signs and their positions. Each persons behave differently when they process these IEs. You can observe and detect the similarities. I find it hard to describe, I can say that ILI sounds much more concrete than you, you sound more complex than ILI. Between I think I sound more vague than you. If I have to give example to visual things, you look upwards when you try to catch your thoughts, sometimes you loose track, you seem more expressive when you talk about certain things that you find interesting.

I am also going to mention about our differences since I think we share the same type. My eyes moves/dart around much more often, I seem more expressive/playful/welcoming compared to you. I think LIIs who have 7 in their tritypes seem more expressive/playful/welcoming than me.
I'm not sure how I could have given factual information in the video in the first place. But I guess that if I were Te ego, I wouldn't figured out a way. Your comments make sense to me. However, like before, I'm conflicted since LIIs ignore Te and have alpha rather than gamma values. However, I don't think I ignore Te and my values have been stereotypically gamma since I was a kid, with alpha influence coming as I began to figure out what I liked. I also don't relate to a lot of things many Ti users say. For example, a few ILEs were saying how they disdain the mandatory physics lab course that they must take next year. They say "why do we need experiments? We can just do math!" I know it was half-joking, but I don't have that sentiment at all. Experiment and real-world facts are the basis by which we determine truth in systems that are not axiomatic. However, perhaps that's not Te valuing but just my being reasonable.

If my type is LII, then the conclusions I would have to come to are that 1) general quadra values are less important than originally thought, 2) the ignoring function isn't truly "ignored". I'll look into those two aspects before I make a decision.

All that being said, if the cognitive basis of socionics is to be respected, then unconscious actions must be taken into consideration - that includes writing/speaking style. That evidence points strongly towards 4D Ti, though I need to look at the precise usage of the demonstrative function to be certain about it being valued.