Personality Cafe banner
1 - 18 of 18 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,721 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Recently I watched this video and I started thinking about if/how it's related to type at all:










Obviously, all types can use critical thinking, and all types have people who don't use it. Certainly there are all kinds of things that are going to be based only on the particular individual.


As an ISJ using Si as a dominant function, however, based on this video's description of critical thinking, I think there are parts of it that can be unsettling to use. Namely, the part at 4:10 or so, the part about needing the "ambiguity of not knowing" in order to consistently think critically.

Basically, I think for me, I feel a lot better when I have something pinned down. I would rather know something for sure and be able to put all of my energy into it. The idea of something being up in the air unsettles me because I don't know what to focus on. I do believe this is related to my dominant Si usage.


I think this is probably true for all Js to some degree, but I feel as though NJs probably are more comfortable using their Ni to constantly look at things from all angles.

And ISJs have Si as their dominant function, so I think that this may be stronger in them than ESJs (besides, there are many more ISJs on PerC to ask, so it's easier to focus there. That's why I'm also making this post in the ISFJ forum).




With ISTJs, I would imagine their Te even further supports this notion, because in my experience, Te causes one to make many more logical decisions more quickly than Ti does. This seems to support the desire to have things pinned down even more.



Basically, to me one big point of this video is that to consistently use critical thinking, one always has to be willing to change their beliefs easier, and it also means that they have to be willing to doubt a lot of things and keep them undecided because there is no definite proof (something that Si seems to greatly rely on). As an Si user, this makes critical thinking difficult to use in some situations (even though I'm sure all types face this in some ways).


So I was curious to see how my own feelings/experiences compared to those of ISTJs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rhee

·
Registered
Joined
·
767 Posts
I tend to draw new conclusions based upon some past experiences. I also leave room for other possibilities, but given time what I observe just will reconfirm whatever theory I had about something. I'm always watching out for that weird quirky moment when something doesn't add up, but I always seem to find out the reason behind it later.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
647 Posts
With ISTJs, I would imagine their Te even further supports this notion, because in my experience, Te causes one to make many more logical decisions more quickly than Ti does. This seems to support the desire to have things pinned down even more.

Basically, to me one big point of this video is that to consistently use critical thinking, one always has to be willing to change their beliefs easier, and it also means that they have to be willing to doubt a lot of things and keep them undecided because there is no definite proof (something that Si seems to greatly rely on). As an Si user, this makes critical thinking difficult to use in some situations (even though I'm sure all types face this in some ways).
After leaving the cult, I basically had my whole world-view turned upside down. There was a lot of deprogramming that had (and still needs) to be done. I devoted a lot of time to reading books on critical thinking, lateral thinking, and logic.

So, perhaps it's very un-ISTJ of me, but what-if questions and not knowing doesn't bother me anymore. I also spend a lot of time collecting data and resorting/reclassifying the data I've already learned.

Also, my top three functions are Si, Ti, Te so I'm pretty confused about why they're supposed to conflict. Descriptions of Ti vs Te confuses me even more because they seem to describe two contradictory processes that's just ONE process in my head.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Owfin

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,234 Posts
Also, my top three functions are Si, Ti, Te so I'm pretty confused about why they're supposed to conflict. Descriptions of Ti vs Te confuses me even more because they seem to describe two contradictory processes that's just ONE process in my head.
When I take those quizzes/test things those are always my top 3 as well. I'm not really too sure what that means.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,245 Posts
As an ISJ using Si as a dominant function, however, based on this video's description of critical thinking, I think there are parts of it that can be unsettling to use. Namely, the part at 4:10 or so, the part about needing the "ambiguity of not knowing" in order to consistently think critically.

Basically, I think for me, I feel a lot better when I have something pinned down. I would rather know something for sure and be able to put all of my energy into it. The idea of something being up in the air unsettles me because I don't know what to focus on. I do believe this is related to my dominant Si usage.
The ambiguity of not knowing definitely does bother me somewhat, but I think I've been taught to let it affect me to a lesser degree.

I remember reading that you've been disciplined in mathematics. You would have been trained to look for accurate answers with precision. Mathematics is the queen of the Sciences as they say, and as a scientist you WOULD be bothered by things left unaccounted for.

OTOH I have a background in social science, where as you know things tend to be somewhat fluffy at times. I deal with man-made constructs that are applied to society. Application of the same construct does not always yield the same result in my field - relevant facts and institutional decisions intervene to act as powerful variables.

However, 'critical thinking' in itself is a pretty broad term. Is critical thinking in mathematics the same as critical thinking in English literature? Would the ability to handle ambiguity assist everyone's critical thinking in the same way regardless of the areas they specialize in? I suspect that it wouldn't.



With ISTJs, I would imagine their Te even further supports this notion, because in my experience, Te causes one to make many more logical decisions more quickly than Ti does. This seems to support the desire to have things pinned down even more.

Basically, to me one big point of this video is that to consistently use critical thinking, one always has to be willing to change their beliefs easier, and it also means that they have to be willing to doubt a lot of things and keep them undecided because there is no definite proof (something that Si seems to greatly rely on). As an Si user, this makes critical thinking difficult to use in some situations (even though I'm sure all types face this in some ways).
I'd like to point out that Te not only confirms but also refutes. It inspects whether the given data objectively lines up with the drawn conclusion. Right now I'm being trained to spot logical holes in people's arguments in order to make counter-arguments. Te is what I use at work.

I think Te is the eternal sceptic; it 'doubts.' It demands concrete evidence, attempts to verify sources, and analyzes whether or not things match up. Si brings forth a wealth of information, Te examines each piece to see whether it's legit or crap. Presented with solid evidence, most ISTJs will not have a problem making adjustments or corrections to their previously-held opinions.

I believe that all 16 types are basically equipped to engage in critical thinking by way of cognitive functions. Attitude and effort will determine whether an individual actually does end up becoming a critical thinker.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,402 Posts
Also, my top three functions are Si, Ti, Te so I'm pretty confused about why they're supposed to conflict. Descriptions of Ti vs Te confuses me even more because they seem to describe two contradictory processes that's just ONE process in my head.
When I take those quizzes/test things those are always my top 3 as well. I'm not really too sure what that means.
It means you probably have a slight preference for Ti over Te but as an auxiliary the orientation is fluid and can change to suit the situation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,721 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
The ambiguity of not knowing definitely does bother me somewhat, but I think I've been taught to let it affect me to a lesser degree.

I remember reading that you've been disciplined in mathematics. You would have been trained to look for accurate answers with precision. Mathematics is the queen of the Sciences as they say, and as a scientist you WOULD be bothered by things left unaccounted for.

OTOH I have a background in social science, where as you know things tend to be somewhat fluffy at times. I deal with man-made constructs that are applied to society. Application of the same construct does not always yield the same result in my field - relevant facts and institutional decisions intervene to act as powerful variables.

However, 'critical thinking' in itself is a pretty broad term. Is critical thinking in mathematics the same as critical thinking in English literature? Would the ability to handle ambiguity assist everyone's critical thinking in the same way regardless of the areas they specialize in? I suspect that it wouldn't.

I think I agree with what you're saying, but I think it's very important for a person to be able to distinguish when something is ambiguous and when it is not. If someone thinks something is not ambiguous (or projects it out of personal comfort) when it really is, then they're going to be pretty close-minded towards improving their opinions about anything related to it.





Rhee said:
I'd like to point out that Te not only confirms but also refutes. It inspects whether the given data objectively lines up with the drawn conclusion. Right now I'm being trained to spot logical holes in people's arguments in order to make counter-arguments. Te is what I use at work.

I think Te is the eternal sceptic; it 'doubts.' It demands concrete evidence, attempts to verify sources, and analyzes whether or not things match up. Si brings forth a wealth of information, Te examines each piece to see whether it's legit or crap. Presented with solid evidence, most ISTJs will not have a problem making adjustments or corrections to their previously-held opinions.
I think what confuses me about how this works is that I don't understand how Te is any different than Ti in this regard. Because it seems to me like Ti does everything that you're describing here as well. If that's the case, what's the difference between the two in this situation?


Rhee said:
I believe that all 16 types are basically equipped to engage in critical thinking by way of cognitive functions. Attitude and effort will determine whether an individual actually does end up becoming a critical thinker.
I agree that everyone certainly is capable of using critical thinking regardless of their type. However, I don't think this means that certain aspects of it can't be more challenging to some types compared to others (if we're speaking generally).

I agree that one's attitude and effort can overcome these challenges, though. But I don't think that means that every type faces critical thinking in the same way. The way in which they overcome their own personal challenges can be different.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
693 Posts
There are times where I struggle with black and white thinking, because I need to see consistency. However, I can understand where there would be shades of gray and how to properly evaluate this circumstances. My need for consistency can be annoying to others, and even to myself. It's not something I can rationally explain; I think it has more to do with seeking structure and order than anything else. However, there is structure and order to the critical thinking process, in order to arrive to a viable conclusion. I'm sure being a sensor probably makes it easier for me, because if I thought like an intuitive I would probably go mad. I hear their thoughts are everywhere.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,158 Posts
i was told by a teacher a few months ago that i will benefit greatly from my ability to think critically. maybe because the improtance of individuality was burned into me from a young age.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,856 Posts
And to bring typology back into this... the videomaker seems to be a T dom to me. I disagree that emotions and opinions are always not legitimate reasoning (my thinking is auxiliary; I'm not so dogmatic about it).
Although my Te doth protest, I agree.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Owfin

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,249 Posts
That video made me very suspicious of the maker's real intent behind it. It reeked of NTism.

I'm sure all the 5s in the audience get excited over videos like that, but not me. I don't need a youtube video to tell me how to think.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sela

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,249 Posts
My thinking is very critical. I see 50 shades of grey.

My thoughts regarding traditions are not set in stone, though they do require some exceptionally good reasons - which I will attempt to think through carefully - before I will dig them up for replacement. Some traditions (and laws) were made for very good reasons.

Example: the Glass-Steagall Act, now repealed (thank you to CitiBank). It was designed to stop banks from getting themselves in the poo from being too "experimental" in the realms of finance. Now American banks are in the poo from being too "experimental" in the realms of finance (haha to Bear Sterns at $2 a share - hertz donut). Can I say "derivatives of derivatives of derivatives".

How self-aware do you have to be to realize when something is A Bad Idea(tm)?

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
693 Posts
Well in that case Yardiff, analysis would have been exceptionally important. I've noticed people who are not willing to be analytical often lack critical thinking skills. Or they are lazy and don't like to think.

Imagine the tantrum astronomers would have thrown after more knowledge about the universe was collected, and it meant their previous knowledge was incorrect or null? Critical thinking requires the acceptance of amassing more knowledge and if you don't like knowledge well...I don't have much to say to you.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,249 Posts
Well in that case Yardiff, analysis would have been exceptionally important. I've noticed people who are not willing to be analytical often lack critical thinking skills. Or they are lazy and don't like to think.

Imagine the tantrum astronomers would have thrown after more knowledge about the universe was collected, and it meant their previous knowledge was incorrect or null? Critical thinking requires the acceptance of amassing more knowledge and if you don't like knowledge well...I don't have much to say to you.
I'm glad to see that you caught my tongue-in-cheek. XD
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,245 Posts
I think I agree with what you're saying, but I think it's very important for a person to be able to distinguish when something is ambiguous and when it is not. If someone thinks something is not ambiguous (or projects it out of personal comfort) when it really is, then they're going to be pretty close-minded towards improving their opinions about anything related to it.
That's a very good point. The more I think about it, the more it seems that I may have given detection of ambiguity less credit than it actually deserves.

I guess my temperament is partly to blame. I like to implement decisions swiftly. Ambiguity bothers me because it slows me down. The times I fell into black-and-white thinking was when I rushed into action before thoroughly thinking out relevant implications. I still make occasional blunders like this. My saving grace is that I listen to criticism and am quick to correct my own mistakes.



I think what confuses me about how this works is that I don't understand how Te is any different than Ti in this regard. Because it seems to me like Ti does everything that you're describing here as well. If that's the case, what's the difference between the two in this situation?
The obsession with external validity (inspecting data to see whther it 'lines up' with concrete evidence, verifying sources etc.) is unique to Te. While Te compares data to empirical evidence, Ti compares data to an internal system of pure logic. Simulatedworld's post was very useful to me:

"Te is an attitude that encourages an external, objective standard when dealing with logic, impersonal facts and ideas. Te people will usually insist on seeing quantifiable, repeatedly demonstrable, empirical evidence before accepting anything. From the Te perspective, there is no such thing as logic without this sort of externalized validity, because impersonal ideas are to be shared and agreed upon by large groups instead of individuals and determined by objective consensus."

"Ti is an attitude that encourages subjective logical decision-making based on our personal and directly experiential ideas of what fits into an impersonal logic framework and what doesn't. When it comes to logic/impersonal ideas, Ti reasons, external consensus can go to hell because it might very well be wrong, no matter how many people believe it or how many experts claim to know the truth. Externally measurable application is not nearly as important to Ti as internal structural integrity and logical consistency with itself."

One thing I've noticed while talking with my ISFJ mother is that she readily accepts my factual findings on a given subject as long as it matches her logical framework. She rarely challenges the credibility of my source. On the other hand I always demand to know the exact sources of her information, and "a medical doctor said it on the morning news" usually doesn't cut it for me. I would go so far as to find out who that specialist is, whether s/he has any published work so far, and whether those findings have gained any scientific consensus or validity in the field. Evidence overrides everything else.



I agree that one's attitude and effort can overcome these challenges, though. But I don't think that means that every type faces critical thinking in the same way. The way in which they overcome their own personal challenges can be different.
Yes. Te users will be stumped in the absence of any external data to either verify or refute a hypothesis. They may reach inaccurate conclusions with flawed evidence. The ability to discern the validity of an evidence may be a crucial part of critical thinking for a Te user.

Ti users would be less affected by this problem because they operate on an internal framework. They would be more adept at logical conceptualization and may reach correct conclusions faster without external aid. Their biggest challenge would lie in continually examining the soundness of their internal logical system, and in presenting their findings to the outside world.

Because of such functional strengths and weaknesses, no single type would be better or less equipped to think critically (while they may face different types of challenges as you correctly pointed out.)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
647 Posts
One thing I've noticed while talking with my ISFJ mother is that she readily accepts my factual findings on a given subject as long as it matches her logical framework. She rarely challenges the credibility of my source. On the other hand I always demand to know the exact sources of her information, and "a medical doctor said it on the morning news" usually doesn't cut it for me. I would go so far as to find out who that specialist is, whether s/he has any published work so far, and whether those findings have gained any scientific consensus or validity in the field. Evidence overrides everything else.
After reading your post I realized I do this too, even for things that are less important than medical decisions.

My Dad must have a well-developed Te. I've never noticed it before, but we ALWAYS preface our conversations with where we got our information. Like "I was reading xxxx" or "I was listening to NPR". The descriptions of our sources can actually get pretty long when we start grilling each other's data.
 
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Top