Can a Te person explain how Te works?

[Slava]

I'm curious what the process of Te is like for a Te person in terms of a mathematical representation, with some examples or symbolic definitions. I read that it's something they actually study in Scientology, "the study of knowingness".

[Expat]

Check my Te types description my my "Te views" thread in the Gamma forum.

[Slava]

Ur my favorite ENTJ now. Sometimes I'm angry at you guys, but you pulled me out of that rut, for now. I guess if I was surrounded by the understanding ones like you, I wouldn't have problems with the dumb ones. I think scientology was actually started as a disguised rebellion against this capitalistic entj-run society. I'm not sure what your background is, but america is really hard on Ne and especially Ti people and makes us take apart our own brains more than anyone to explain ourselves, and why we have a right to be the way we are, and if we can't take our brain apart and can't explain why we are how we are, then we suffer.

I really enjoyed your posts about your views of functions, very nice models.

You are blue to me (in russian galuboy, or light blue, means homosexual.. just thought id point that out in humorous light)

[krieger]

Hm. There seems to be something about Te that involves the placement of facts as 'nodes' on a chronological scale... As to what those facts are composed of; that seems to be influenced by the master/slave personality relation (if you dig crosstype). Maybe tcaudilllg can tell us more on that.

In any case I am totally lost to Te or any other dynamic function which means time is little more than a big black ocean to me in which I can never hope to navigate.

[Joy]

There seems to be something about Te that involves the placement of facts as 'nodes' on a chronological scale

this is a very static explanation (not to say it's accurate or inaccurate... I'm not sure I follow where you're going with that)

[krieger]

I tend to recognize it as a deficiency in myself that others don't have. I have gleaned from other statements you've made that your experience of time is not much different, while you consider yourself a dynamic type. Despite this we both seem to think that it is related to the static/dynamic dichotomy.

I don't think conventional socionics can offer an explanation of this 'phenomenom', so I would instead look to crosstype for an answer. How's this hypothesis:

- people with static 'slave' types don't see time as a chonology, rather they are focussed on 'space' eg. the current moment.

This would have as a consequence that your crosstype is of the format Exxj-Ixxj.

(why am I even writing this... joy is not going to stoop to answering this seriously )

On a side note, Albert Einstein, the man who invented the theory that time is no more than a fourth spatial dimension, claimed to be a person with a static slave type by tcaudilllg, commented on how he succeeded at doing what he did by virtue of how he didn't develop his sense of time until he investigated it in physics. Coincidence?

What ever may be the case the way people experience space and time must be of extreme importance to typology.

[Exodus]

What ever may be the case the way people experience space and time must be of extreme importance to typology.

[krieger]

[Exodus]

Hotel, next time you get an urge to demonstrate your lack of wit and imagination how about doing it in a thread where I do NOT happen to be talking in at the time?

Thank you.

LOL.

Don't take yourself so seriously. I was merely noting the ridiculousness of your statement. Not to say it is incorrect, just that it is hyperbole that lacks factual content.

[krieger]

[Exodus]

Point taken.

I should note that I find the majority of your posts highly insightful.

[Joy]

I tend to recognize it as a deficiency in myself that others don't have. I have gleaned from other statements you've made that your experience of time is not much different, while you consider yourself a dynamic type. Despite this we both seem to think that it is related to the static/dynamic dichotomy.

I don't think conventional socionics can offer an explanation of this 'phenomenom', so I would instead look to crosstype for an answer. How's this hypothesis:

- people with static 'slave' types don't see time as a chonology, rather they are focussed on 'space' eg. the current moment.

This would have as a consequence that your crosstype is of the format Exxj-Ixxj.

(why am I even writing this... joy is not going to stoop to answering this seriously )

On a side note, Albert Einstein, the man who invented the theory that time is no more than a fourth spatial dimension, claimed to be a person with a static slave type by tcaudilllg, commented on how he succeeded at doing what he did by virtue of how he didn't develop his sense of time until he investigated it in physics. Coincidence?

What ever may be the case the way people experience space and time must be of extreme importance to typology.

while I have no comments as to my type and really do not wish to discuss the cross type theory, I'm glad that someone does

[olduser]

I tend to recognize it as a deficiency in myself that others don't have. I have gleaned from other statements you've made that your experience of time is not much different, while you consider yourself a dynamic type. Despite this we both seem to think that it is related to the static/dynamic dichotomy.

I don't think conventional socionics can offer an explanation of this 'phenomenom', so I would instead look to crosstype for an answer. How's this hypothesis:

- people with static 'slave' types don't see time as a chonology, rather they are focussed on 'space' eg. the current moment.

This would have as a consequence that your crosstype is of the format Exxj-Ixxj.

(why am I even writing this... joy is not going to stoop to answering this seriously )

On a side note, Albert Einstein, the man who invented the theory that time is no more than a fourth spatial dimension, claimed to be a person with a static slave type by tcaudilllg, commented on how he succeeded at doing what he did by virtue of how he didn't develop his sense of time until he investigated it in physics. Coincidence?

What ever may be the case the way people experience space and time must be of extreme importance to typology.

You are ignoring the purpose of Socionics. It is too simple to explain exact behaviour and understanding of time and space. It's a very simple system, and should be treated as such if it's going to be effective and applicable.

remember!!!:
6 billions people and 16 types! don't get too complex because you it's incredibly easy to lose your validity with those figures.

[mikemex]

I don't think Te is in the same class as Ti. Rather than evaluating things in terms of true and false, it evaluates things in terms of relevant and irrelevant. Thus I see Te as relevance logic.

For example, Te types are known for their efficiency at work because they find it easy to distingish between important (or relevant) and superfluous (irrelevant) tasks. Detectives, in which ESTj are overrepresented, get their job done because they gather a lot of facts (Si) and know how to present them when they are relevant (Te).

There is a movie, "I, robot", in which the main character gets a small device which "simulates intelligence". It contains pre-recorded responses and, given the right number, can mimic a real person. However, the program is still limited to the available responses like Te is limited to evaluating existing facts (Si) and concepts (Ni). True intelligence requieres synthesis of ideas and that requieres Ti and Fi (introverted logics), because introverted functions in general are self-producing.

Having an INTp girlfriend I have had plenty of time to observe that the supposed "logic" of Te types doesn't really come from Te, but from Ti, and can be lacking because of the unconcious nature of Ti in such types. It's like the widespread misconception that comes from MBTI saying that all NF are in the same class. Fi NFs are quite different from Fe NFs. Fi NFs are logical, contrary to what most people thinks of them, and are seem as emotional due to the unconcious influence of a strong Fe.

Fe, by the way, is closely related to Te, just like Fi is closely related to Ti. Both Fe and Te are relevance logics, but Fe uses subjetive paraments while Te is objetive.

[XoX]

I don't think Te is in the same class as Ti. Rather than evaluating things in terms of true and false, it evaluates things in terms of relevant and irrelevant. Thus I see Te as relevance logic.

For example, Te types are known for their efficiency at work because they find it easy to distingish between important (or relevant) and superfluous (irrelevant) tasks. Detectives, in which ESTj are overrepresented, get their job done because they gather a lot of facts (Si) and know how to present them when they are relevant (Te).

There is a movie, "I, robot", in which the main character gets a small device which "simulates intelligence". It contains pre-recorded responses and, given the right number, can mimic a real person. However, the program is still limited to the available responses like Te is limited to evaluating existing facts (Si) and concepts (Ni). True intelligence requieres synthesis of ideas and that requieres Ti and Fi (introverted logics), because introverted functions in general are self-producing.

Having an INTp girlfriend I have had plenty of time to observe that the supposed "logic" of Te types doesn't really come from Te, but from Ti, and can be lacking because of the unconcious nature of Ti in such types. It's like the widespread misconception that comes from MBTI saying that all NF are in the same class. Fi NFs are quite different from Fe NFs. Fi NFs are logical, contrary to what most people thinks of them, and are seem as emotional due to the unconcious influence of a strong Fe.

Fe, by the way, is closely related to Te, just like Fi is closely related to Ti. Both Fe and Te are relevance logics, but Fe uses subjetive paraments while Te is objetive.

Hard to say if this is true or not but it is a refreshing and interesting take on the subject.

[Creepy-Diana]

.

[Slava]

There is a movie, "I, robot", in which the main character gets a small device which "simulates intelligence". It contains pre-recorded responses and, given the right number, can mimic a real person. However, the program is still limited to the available responses like Te is limited to evaluating existing facts (Si) and concepts (Ni). True intelligence requieres synthesis of ideas and that requieres Ti and Fi (introverted logics), because introverted functions in general are self-producing.

I was talking with my dad about prefrontal lobotomies yesterday. He mentioned someone he was aquainted with, a minister who had the operation, and it left him without, as my dad put it, "creativity; without the ability to go one step further". Instead of being able to synthesize new sermons, people soon realized that he was just taking all of his old ones and piecing them together in different ways. That ability to create, to draw on the old to make new connections and synthesize something different was gone. It's gone in many brain injuries also, which is what started the conversation.

But the ability to do that is not limited to Ti and Fi. If as you put it introverted functions are self-producing, then why couldn't a Te type draw on their strong Si or Ni for synthesis?

I produce with my Ne all the time. I just use different puzzle pieces... all functions manipulate information based components that come from another function, and use methods to manipulate them that also come from other functions that develop the methods. It loops back on itself. I can for example teach someone different types of data structures that I came up with for storing some kind of information, and they will use them to create algorithms. Their dynamic algorithms however are represented with static symbols, which they would communicate back to me, and allow me to make even more complex data structures. A lobotomy seems like it would just impair the persons ability to perform mental manipulations, but access to memory is still present.