Personality Cafe banner

1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
160 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I have been in a few forums recently where the differences between Te and Ti have come up for discussion. I am having a really difficult time understanding the logic behind Ti and I wanted to get a perspective from Ti dominant users. In a thread in the ISTJ forum, Te was explained as systematic thinking where everything has a place and needs to fit in some sort of system. madhatter came to the forum and offered the analogy of Ti being more like a web and that everything is just there and one thought leads to another at a somewhat random or more chaotic pace. This really helped me a lot, but I was hoping I could get more perspectives on how Ti works because I would really like to understand it better. Thanks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,207 Posts
Both types of thinking are concerned with systems, just different in their orientation. Example: You get a new toy, assembly required. Te is a set of step-by-step instructions to put it together. Ti is a diagram showing the parts and how they fit together.

I have decent troubleshooting ability and love solving problems, but am not so good at or interested in organizing my budget or my clutter.

Te is linear and efficient, Ti is non-linear and flexible.

Te-doms are control freaks, Ti-doms are lazy. :laughing:
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
349 Posts
Well, I offer to you the description of Ti that I put in another thread. I hope this could help:

[Ti]

The most accurate way I could describe mi Ti dom in simple words is something like this:

Fractalized cosmovision.

If I explain this with some more words:

Find the simplest and uniform algorithm that could generate the whole reality that is known at every time.

And now I'll develop a bit more this idea.

At instant T sub 0, you have in your mind a concrete amount of information what constitutes "reality". Ti at work would analyze every property of "reality" and would try to find a "universal and simplest rule" that could explain this reality. This rule must be uniform in the same meaning that a continuum and derivable function has in Maths: the algorithm must be capable of justifying from the smallest portion of reality to the whole system with the same rule. No contradictions are allowed (a rule for a concrete portion of reality and another rule for a different portion, etc).


At instant T sub 1, an extra amount of information is provided, so reality expands. The algorithm is tested, if it still works, then OK. If not, it must be revised, changed, for being able to work with the increased reality. Like a bayesian inference.

The algorithm is created from what is perceived as a certainty (this idea is malleable, not inmutable) and used for evaluating ideas whose grade of certainty is unknown.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
547 Posts
Both types of thinking are concerned with systems, just different in their orientation. Example: You get a new toy, assembly required. Te is a set of step-by-step instructions to put it together. Ti is a diagram showing the parts and how they fit together.

I have decent troubleshooting ability and love solving problems, but am not so good at or interested in organizing my budget or my clutter.

Te is linear and efficient, Ti is non-linear and flexible.

Te-doms are control freaks, Ti-doms are lazy. :laughing:
This is very true. My dad is ISTJ and I'm ISTP.

The way we attack problems is a little different, and this feels like a good description. Sometimes when I'm thinking about a mechanical problem, I have diagrams in my head that I "explode" outward. And when I have to put something together I NEVER read the instructions -- I look for pictures only. Words always get in the way.

My dad is a step-by-step sort of person, and while he's very good at getting things finished, I expend far less energy.

Right now I'm working in a manufacturing plant and I'm following someone who's dismantling and reassembling a complicated machine. The whole machine is in my head as a diagram with all the pieces in a "web" around the main parts. I can't name all the parts, but I know how they go together already.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
160 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Te is linear and efficient, Ti is non-linear and flexible.

Te-doms are control freaks, Ti-doms are lazy. :laughing:

I can see this :laughing:.





Well, I offer to you the description of Ti that I put in another thread. I hope this could help:

[Ti]

The most accurate way I could describe mi Ti dom in simple words is something like this:

Fractalized cosmovision.

If I explain this with some more words:

Find the simplest and uniform algorithm that could generate the whole reality that is known at every time.

And now I'll develop a bit more this idea.

At instant T sub 0, you have in your mind a concrete amount of information what constitutes "reality". Ti at work would analyze every property of "reality" and would try to find a "universal and simplest rule" that could explain this reality. This rule must be uniform in the same meaning that a continuum and derivable function has in Maths: the algorithm must be capable of justifying from the smallest portion of reality to the whole system with the same rule. No contradictions are allowed (a rule for a concrete portion of reality and another rule for a different portion, etc).


At instant T sub 1, an extra amount of information is provided, so reality expands. The algorithm is tested, if it still works, then OK. If not, it must be revised, changed, for being able to work with the increased reality. Like a bayesian inference.

The algorithm is created from what is perceived as a certainty (this idea is malleable, not inmutable) and used for evaluating ideas whose grade of certainty is unknown.


Wow, I take it you are quite the math wiz? Thank you for the explanation, I am getting a better understanding of Ti. I don't think I will ever fully be ale to understand it but I can somewhat see what you are saying. I am getting that Ti logic is a bit more in-depth while it looks like Te logic is more breadth.


Now what I am wondering is how would this description differentiates from Te? If Ti is about the "simplest and uniform algorithm that could generate the whole reality that is known at every time", then how does Te compare? Does it go back t the instructions example: Ti sees the whole reality at once, where Te sees it step-by-step/linear?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
349 Posts
I can see this :laughing:.
Wow, I take it you are quite the math wiz? Thank you for the explanation, I am getting a better understanding of Ti. I don't think I will ever fully be ale to understand it but I can somewhat see what you are saying. I am getting that Ti logic is a bit more in-depth while it looks like Te logic is more breadth.
I saw in another forum (whose URL is anathema here, so sorry, I will not post it because I could get banned) a set of simple exercises for helping users to understand the point of view of their non native functions. The functions were not defined, because if they were, non native users would simply use the definition instead "trying to see and use them internally". The Ti exercise was this:

To experience Introverted Thinking:

• This is a multi-stage exercise. Give yourself at least half an hour, alone and in a quiet place where no one will disturb you.

1. Stare at this picture a while, without talking or verbalizing:



2. Draw an additional three rows and columns of lines around the ones already drawn, continuing the pattern. (You'll probably want to print out the picture.) Don't verbally reason out where the lines should go, just draw them to fit the pattern that you see. Use your hand, not your voice (even your internal voice).

3. Understand the pattern. Now it's OK to reason about it. Describe the pattern in the simplest way you can, without sacrificing any aspect of the pattern. Your description must capture everything that is going on inside the picture. It's OK to start with a vague description and/or a description that doesn't imply everything in the pattern (or, for that matter, a description that's wrong). Keep hammering away at your description to make it simpler and simpler, until it seems that you have captured in a single tiny nugget everything there is to say about the pattern. Your ultimate nugget of description should imply: all the lines that are actually there, where the lines would have to go in additional rows and columns outside the ones shown, and where the lines would have to go if you drew more rows and columns in between the ones shown.

After thinking about it, I realize how my native Ti dom function would see it and which was its real goal at the deepest level. This helped to me to improve the understanding of my own function and define it in this, in my opinion enough accurate, way.

If you're a non native user, you could only understand it in a non deep level. In fact you will never be able to see it and use it as an native user would do, because if you're not an user, you have an opposite function which is "contradicted" and annoyed by this way of seeing and managing the world. Don't worry, it's a general problem. The same for me and Ni function, for example. I can understand it reasonably well, like recognizing its behavior in other users, but I will never be able of see the world with it and use it as they do because I do not have this function.

Now what I am wondering is how would this description differentiates from Te? If Ti is about the "simplest and uniform algorithm that could generate the whole reality that is known at every time", then how does Te compare? Does it go back t the instructions example: Ti sees the whole reality at once, where Te sees it step-by-step/linear?
Te, as an extroverted function, has "pragmatical" goals, and the most important has already be pointed by you, it's linear, whereas Ti is not.

Te feels satisfied using pragmatical rules for achieving a pragmatical goal (usable truth), whereas Ti tries to see the "perfect truth" at the deepest level.

For example, in the Ti exercise, I could see a Te user trying to solve it in this way: "I compare two rows and deduce how to make the next; I compare two columns and deduce how to make the next". So the Te user solves the problem only in an inductive (linear) and pragmatical (I do not need more, this works) way: making columns based in the previous, making rows based in the previous.

A Ti user is not "satisfied" with this linear way of thinking; he/she goes further and try to find a rule that could generate every line independently of the others. Making columns from previous and rows from previous works, but they are TWO DIFFERENT RULES and do not see the problem as a single issue, as a whole. Ti user wants a perfect rule that could work for everything. Something like "I locate at (0,0) coordinates and use an algorithm that is able of drawing every line only considering distance and angle".

Of course a Te user can also find this "algorithm" but this is not the nature of Te. Ti seeks for this naturally, and Te only do it if asked... if it works, it is enough for Te.

More or less, this is the difference between Ti and Te functions at work. There are more differences, of course; Te as extroverted needs "external validation" (it trusts in others, like the opinion of the experts) whereas Ti as introverted does not need external validation (Earth is not flat regardless the whole humanity could believe this...).

An extroverted function is always "bidirectional": it is fed by the world but it also projects its nature to the world. Te uses its "pragmatical solutions" for modifying the surroundings (like ordering things), Ti does not (another function of the user, Ne or Se, could do this in its particular way).

P.S. Recognizing the picture as a vector field and mathematically solving it does not make someone being a Ti user. The quid is different.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
273 Posts
Ti-doms want to place everything they perceive (via Se for ISTPs or Ne for INTPs) into some coherent internal system to arrive at a universal truth. In the case of INTPs those truths are often abstract and big picture as they are using Ti to make sense of intuitive perceptions. In the case of ISTPs those truths happen to be more concrete and real-world due to the use of Se to take in the information.

Te-doms want to force their internal truths onto the real-world. Hence all the bloody budgets, rules, regulations, and colour-coded sodding socks.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
160 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
Te feels satisfied using pragmatical rules for achieving a pragmatical goal (usable truth), whereas Ti tries to see the "perfect truth" at the deepest level.

.

Wow, thank you for the effort you put into explaining Ti! The statement above especially resonates with me and what I have seen in a lot of Ti users. My Te friends and I will typically go for whatever "works"; placing importance on the 'what' but not necessarily caring for the 'how' or 'why'... whereas my Ti friends aren't fully satisfied with something just "working", like you pointed out. I notice that a lot of Ti users won't accept a lot of statements/rules until they have thought it through themselves and it makes sense to them internally; "seeing the perfect truth at the deepest level".


I think Ti will always remain the most most difficult function for me to understand, but your examples helped me a lot. I can at least see where Ti users are coming from, if not how they got there. Your help has been much appreciated!
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top