Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: The scientific conformity of ILE-Ti

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    319
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default The scientific conformity of ILE-Ti

    It's good that they're one of the types least likely to follow social stereotypes and to like social (whether gender or sexual or just non-gender related behavioral, Democratic types, especially those subtyped in direction of Beta, are less likely to support sexual and gender norms, although ILE-Ti were less likely to work in the 1800s when women didn't work much, so they did go along with that one) norms, but I've noticed they tend to support the most popular and well-known medical treatments and they're too busy seeking pleasure than interested in inventing revolutionary devices and methods. And they often have mainstream political views and tend to go along with the shitty, tyrannical majority on many things. It's like they're never contrarians for the sake of being a contrarian. They differ most from norms in the pleasures they seek, in the things, foods and drinks and clothes they buy and the places they go. I guess having Causal-Determinist cognitive style makes them relatively unable to solve problems in a revolutionary way; they basically use Ti to play with things and try to understand things forever, and then it's never useful (Te). And they often look too much into text/research, rather than reality when it comes to judging/trying to judge peoples' character and intentions and they're shocked when they see someone they thought was predictable do something different because they think people are more rigid and unchanging than they actually are; for those reasons, they make terrible psychologists and they often major in psychology because they can't usually figure people out on their own, without research and adherence to some system, which is basically directions for them and they wind up making mistakes when dealing with people because of that. They think of themselves as great psychologists, when their only real people skills is to manipulate people and that comes from their Ti and knowledge of their own actions rather than any real understanding of other people.

    And the ones who have a huge preference for deduction and don't trust inductive reasoning never do much revolutionary.

    Gamma NTs are way more scientifically non-traditional and less by the book than ILE-Ti. ILI are much more critical towards common knowledge, much more willing to test everything, to not adhere to frameworks, and much more non-traditional and more original outside the box thinkers who actually get things done when it comes to creativity and technologies and less willing to make trade-offs. I guess that's reflected in ILI having the highest IQ of all the types. I know ILE-Ti and SLE-Ti are likely to say the critic doesn't count as much as the one who does things, but thing is that ILI both criticize a lot and they do a lot.

    So being non-conformists isn't really a huge defining feature of ILE-Ti IMO; they're not as independent minded as they think they are, they often go into a field and stay in it until retirement and never find a useful or groundbreaking or unusual solution.

    So I would rate them as about 62.5% non-conformist; while that's certainly higher than 50%, it's not better than average by a whole helluva lot.
    Last edited by Disturbed; 09-22-2020 at 09:34 PM.

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    12,178
    Mentioned
    1114 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    The least people are conformistic where they are assured - hence in strong regions. Scientific / technical researches and abstract operations there relate most to NT functions. This makes NT types as most critical to scientific researches, to interpretations of facts and hypotheses.
    They like to create hypotheses and to experiment with that, have higher interest to new and hence often to lesser based regions, but don't mix an interest and naive trusting. Where their emotions are not touched much - they keep good criticism.
    Also, from point of people having regions as weak is harder to understand correctly the basis to trust to opinions there. They may not only trust too much, but also to be redundatly negative.
    Last edited by Sol; 09-22-2020 at 10:36 PM.
    Types examples: video bloggers, actors

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    319
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sol View Post
    The least people are conformistic where they are assured - hence in strong regions. Scientific / technical researches and abstract operations there relate most to NT functions. This makes NT types as most critical to scientific researches, to interpretations of facts and hypotheses.
    They like to create hypotheses and to experiment with that, have higher interest to new and hence often to lesser based regions, but don't mix an interest and naive trusting. Where their emotions are not touched much - they keep good criticism.
    Also, from point of people having regions as weak is harder to understand correctly the basis to trust to opinions there. They may not only trust too much, but also to be redundatly negative.
    The bolded doesn't fit my experience. Generally, Gamma NTs are less by the book, less working within the frameworks and more frustrated with things as they are than Alpha NTs. Another thing that makes ILIs more original than ILE-Ti is that they change their viewpoints more than Alpha NTs do whereas once an ILE-Ti has made up their mind about something they're not real likely to change it. Being so good at seeing cause and effect relationships and especially going by research that says this is the cause and effect makes the ILE-Ti less creative. Gamma NTs James Cameron and Stanley Kubrick were way more original than any recent ILE movie director that I know of except maybe Spielberg and we don't know that Spielberg is an ILE-Ti (although he was Fe valuing unless he was an ESI-Se) and even then his ideas weren't quite as "out there", as original as Stanley Kubrick's things. And Carl Sagan was an LIE-Ni and just as original, if not moreso than his ILE-Ti first wife Lynn Margulis.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •