How did you manage to improve Ti?
I also dual weild Ti and Te quite effectively, and I have been pondering this for some time. Might be my fourteen years old close friendship with an INTJ that has made me build these skills.I suspect the current function theory is presented simply because it was there to be presented. I've noticed some anomalies within personality groups that I think is best explained buy them possessing radically different functional stacks than the theory suggests or maybe even allows for.
For instance I read other ENTJs writing and recognize some similarities... other ENTJs read me and have no problem seeing me as ENTJ, but I'm just not the same on some level. Most of the time people recognizing me as an ENTJ as a "Well.. he must be because there's simply no other extroverted thinker he could be" feel to it. A self analysis of my writing style tells me that I often express myself in a Ti fashion.
I think it might have been a childhood development thing. I pushed my emotions to the bottom of the barrel and honed my ability to read people and situations, and see what made them tic, how to break them down, etc. Perhaps it was a defensive measure... or perhaps it's just the way I was born.
So Ti doesn't need external validation? Is that the whole difference between Ti and Te? Doesn't sound hollistic enoughYou can't have both. The function tests are poor and give bad results. Often Te is listed as an organization skill. Ti is perfectly capable of that too, so that's why it may appear you use both.
It basically comes down to that Te requires external validation and evidence to come to it's conclusions. Ti doesn't. It may be hard to grasp that. But I bet if you are Ti user, you've probably clashed with a Te user without realizing why. And vice versa. Both probably wondering what is wrong with the other person.
It's not the entire difference, but it's one of the hallmarks. I think another one is Te is linear and Ti doesn't have to be.So Ti doesn't need external validation? Is that the whole difference between Ti and Te? Doesn't sound hollistic enough
Whenever the chief value is given to the subjective process, that other kind of thinking arises which stands opposed to extraverted thinking, namely, that purely subjective orientation of thought which I have termed introverted. A thinking arises from this other orientation that is neither determined by objective facts nor directed towards objective data -- a thinking, therefore, that proceeds from subjective data and is directed towards subjective ideas or facts of a subjective character. I do not wish to enter more fully into this kind of thinking here; I have merely established its existence for the purpose of giving a necessary complement to the extraverted thinking process, whose nature is thus brought to a clearer focus.
Such a conflict, we might think, could be easily adjusted if only we clearly discriminated objects of a subjective from those of an objective nature. Unfortunately, however, such a discrimination is a matter of impossibility, although not a few have attempted it. Even if such a separation were possible, it would be a very disastrous proceeding, since in themselves both orientations are one-sided, with a definitely restricted validity; hence they both require this mutual correction. Thought is at once sterilized, whenever thinking is brought, to any great extent, under the influence of objective data, since it becomes degraded into a mere appendage of objective facts; in which case, it is no longer able to free itself from objective data for the purpose of establishing an abstract idea. The process of thought is reduced to mere 'reflection', not in the sense of 'meditation', but in the sense of a mere imitation that makes no essential affirmation beyond what was already visibly and immediately present in the objective data. Such a thinking-process leads naturally and directly back to the objective fact, but never beyond it ; not once, therefore, can it lead to the coupling of experience with an objective idea. And, vice versa, when this thinking has an objective idea for its object, it is quite unable to grasp the practical individual experience, but persists in a more or less tautological position. The materialistic mentality presents a magnificent example of this.
Do you think all people are aware of how they truly are and answer the questions on the test to correspond exactly to their true personality?Then why is it so that countless of people who rely heavily on T seem to not only score highly on both Ti and Te but actually relate to both?
I don't just see this in heavy T users but heavy F users as well as heavy S users. I was told that it was normal but the cognitive functions don't say so. Strange it is.