Personality Cafe banner
1 - 20 of 38 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
41 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Okay, I'm still trying to make some sense out of these cognitive functions and how we use them so bear with me. I already know my Fe and Fi suck, so I'm not even going to go there. As for Te vs Ti, I want to know how they differ from each other in the way they often prefer to learn, or how they look at the world. Also, does it affect the facial expressions they make while they communicate to others? I've seen some sources stating that Te tends to talk differently or display different facial expressions as compared to Ti while communicating. If that is true then how do they differ?

The reason I'm so curious is because I already know I use Ni and Se, and I already know that tend to avoid making decisions based on my own emotions or the emotions of others. However, whether I primarily use Te or Ti will cause my entire MBTI code to change (well okay, everything but the T changes.) Normally I'd go off of the percentages such as which MBTI code is rarer than the other, and make the assumption that I'm most likely the more common personality type. Problem is, both ISTP and ENTJ are rare among females, so I can't really go off of the percentages this time. Female ISTP is 2-3% and female ENTJ is 1-4% (percentages vary depending on the sources but when it comes down to it, both are rare). I tend to enjoy planning strategies, taking leadership roles, and setting up physical chats, lists, etc. and most of my knowledge depends on unbiased facts that are presented to me. Most of these traits are often associated with Te dominant types, but is it possible to be Ti dominant and still often display these traits?


"Te, or extroverted Thinking:
It's an attitude that encourages an external, objective standard when dealing with logic, impersonal facts and ideas. Te, when arguing, will tend to cite appeals to authority and other widely accepted, externally focused evidence; i.e., citing books or prominent authors/studies, or any widely accepted consensus among the external world of people who study the topic in question. 'The experts all agree that this is the case' is a very Te-oriented argument, because it relies on external standards and context for its evaluation of logical decisions.

For this reason Te people will usually insist on seeing quantifiable, repeatedly demonstrable, empirical evidence before accepting anything. If you can't put it in a test tube, measure it and repeat these results any time for all to see, it's not valid. The scientific method is extremely Te-oriented. 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."

Valuing the scientific method? Constantly citing external sources during a debate? Not fully accepting something until it can be physically measured or proven? These are things I do all the time, but again, is it possible for a Ti dominant type to act this way as well?

"Ti is focused on the blueprint, the design, the idea--while Te is focused on the application of that idea into an objectively measurable process. Externally measurable application is not nearly as important to Ti as internal structural integrity and logical consistency with itself.

Ti: What logical relationships necessitate this system working the way it does, and how can I make them make sense to me?

Te: What externally verifiable, quantifiable evidence can we show that this is logical, and what tangible goal can be served by spending our time on it?"

Questions I often ask my teachers are, "What real world application does this have? What situation would we apply this to in real life? How are we going to use this?" I don't want knowledge for the sake of having knowledge. I want knowledge I can actually use in any future problems or debates I may have. I don't want to learn everything there is to technology just because I feel like it, I came to college specifically with the goal of becoming a robotics engineer. Same point of view applies to how I work out. I don't lift weights simply because I enjoy it, I lift weights because I have a specific body type in mind that must be achieved within a set time frame of four months, and I've got a schedule laid out for the entire span of these months. As one martial arts book I read put it, it doesn't matter how or why it works, all that matters is that it does work. But again, for all I know Ti doms could be thinking this way as well.

Okay, I probably just answered my own question but I feel the need to get more external opinions on this and I want to make sure my understanding of Te vs Ti is correct. So that brings me back to the main point of this thread: real life examples of Te and Ti in action. I understand that it's hard to evaluate the two unless secondary functions are taken into account however, so it'd be best to give examples of scenarios on how a Te/Si and Te/Ni would react to a situation as opposed to a Ti/Ne or Ti/Se. If you put both a Te and a Ti dominant type into a classroom setting, how would one take in the info as opposed to the other? Also, if it's true that they behave differently in conversation as some sources state, then could someone provide videos of a Ti/Ne talking and a Te/Ni talking so that I could compare the two to how people often state I behave or look while I talk with someone?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
4,227 Posts
Didn't read the entire thing, but here's a quick sketch of the two:

Ti says A=B=C=D=E. It values a way of thinking in which there is a logical progression from one point to the next that creates a system. They focus on sorting out inconsistencies within their system, wanting it to "work," preferably without error. This is why Ti people tend to correct facts when they think you've mis-spoke - they tend to want consistency and accuracy, as this creates validity in their style of thinking. However well their system "works" on its own, Ti thinking sometimes misses the end goal/point, and is such criticized by

Te: A=E. Te people tend to be concerned with output and result. What's the end result or payout, regardless of the process or the way in which individual steps get you there, and does this amount to efficiency when all is said and done? Unlike Ti logic that deals with creating a structure that "works," Te logic simply uses what's around factually to make a strong case. "The facts are what they are, regardless of how or why, and they come together to prove X." The problem here is that sometimes Te thinking makes assumptions that are not valid and runs with them.

The difference, then, is that Ti values a logical progression in which each piece works so consistently with the next that it couldn't be logically refuted from that person's point of view (introverted), even if not practical. Te values a logical progression where multiple pieces of data from either the same or different outside sources (extraverted) is taken for exactly what it says it is, and tied together to provide enough evidence to make the proof overwhelmingly obvious, even if there is more going on beneath the surface that isn't accounted for.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,330 Posts
Ti says A=B=C=D=E. It values a way of thinking in which there is a logical progression from one point to the next that creates a system. They focus on sorting out inconsistencies within their system, wanting it to "work," preferably without error. This is why Ti people tend to correct facts when they think you've mis-spoke - they tend to want consistency and accuracy, as this creates validity in their style of thinking. However well their system "works" on its own, Ti thinking sometimes misses the end goal/point, and is such criticized by
To expand on this and the reasoning behind the inconsistencies, to me, is that Ti is kind of like a complex file system, factual errors and logical inconsistencies are often challenged in order to preserve the sanctity of that system; or to redefine and reconcile where a 'record' is 'filed' (ie. re-evaluate the system or that point's place in the system).


To me, Thinking is essentially defining and prioritizing based on objective* criteria. Ti is based on subjective, internal criteria, such as principles, frameworks, and classifications. Te is based on objective**, external criteria, such as rules, structure, and metrics.

* objective as in goal-oriented
** objective as in object-oriented; ie external to the mind

To the bolded line in quote: hahahah! all the time :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
41 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Oh okay. I understand now. I definitely use Te more. I have a habit of making assumptions and trying to rush through problems. Then afterwards I realize I missed some important info and miscalculated something. That was one of my main issues in math class, the teacher would ask me to use a specific method so that I could understand how it works, but then I'd just use a different method and say "this way is faster and more efficient, I got the answer so who cares about the other way."

Another way someone put it was in terms of superpowers: ti is superspeed whereas te is teleportation. Te can be faster, but if you make the wrong assumption then you might end up in the wrong place.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
58 Posts
Oh okay. I understand now. I definitely use Te more. I have a habit of making assumptions and trying to rush through problems. Then afterwards I realize I missed some important info and miscalculated something. That was one of my main issues in math class, the teacher would ask me to use a specific method so that I could understand how it works, but then I'd just use a different method and say "this way is faster and more efficient, I got the answer so who cares about the other way."

Another way someone put it was in terms of superpowers: ti is superspeed whereas te is teleportation. Te can be faster, but if you make the wrong assumption then you might end up in the wrong place.
I have a INTP (Ti dominant, in other words) friend who does A=E all the time. He thinks B, C and D is too obvious to point out. Kind of like how you don't explain why 1 + 3 = 4.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,452 Posts
Go onto the debate forum, find a debate on a controversial issue and read the difference between XNTJ and INTP, the difference is obvious. The Te reasoning is easier to refute in a purely logical manner, because of various leaps that have been made, unstated assumptions, however it tends to be consistent with a range of external sources on the topic.


The Ti reasoning is harder to refute on a purely logical basis, because if it's seen as being in a vacuum it's very often sound, however once you start to introduce externalities to it, it may quickly fall apart.


The main difference is that Te reasoning is based on being consistent with established data. This includes statistics, various facts, and generally things that can be observed. Ti reasoning isn't really based on data, so much as it seems to use data as a "jump-off" point and then goes "nuts".


To be somewhat hyperbolic, Te in a debate on gun control would cite statistics and other data, whereas Ti would wonder if guns really exist at all or if they are just mental constructs.


You can also see a difference in that Te seems to respect external data a lot more than Ti, in my experience Ti users tend to dismiss external data a lot of the time based on unstated and arbitrary criteria and only accept data that fits their subjective model.


In Te reasoning, the thinking has to "fit" with the known data, whereas in Ti reasoning the data has to fit with the thinking. As a Te user, I tend to find Ti thinking as "ass backwards" and "mental masturbation". A good example of this would be Immanuel Kant (supposedly an INTP) who spent god knows how many years perfecting his moral axioms, and reasoning about objective morality, where my perspective is that it doesn't really matter if such a thing as objective morality exists if people are not compelled to follow it 100% of the time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
330 Posts
Te is a like a machine gun, it is fast and effective
Ti is more like a shotgun or sniper, it is precise, it is extremely unpredictable
Ti seeks logical consistenty and are more likely to calculate what will happen in the moment in their head. Te seeks effiency, it is blunt and are the number 1 function to say that legends are a bunch of buy unless they are in touch with their ni, ne or fi
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
780 Posts
Te will support every position that is likely smart as per current empirical knowledge and popular opinion, regardless of contradiction in the extrapolation of potentials. Arguments will be conclusive and concrete. Decision is the source and telos. It is discrete.

Ti will seek a principle and will not support positions that could be contradictory without great hesitation. Arguments will be tentative and abstract. Contemplation is the source and telos. It is continuous.

Example: Te may argue liberalism when it clearly works (drugs) and not when according to evidence it doesn't (guns). Ti may argue it for both, not because it ignores or misconstrues the evidence but because it's an intellectual challenge to create a principle that subsumes all intelligence. To Te, the challenge instead lies in collecting as many intelligent positions as possible. To both, the other one's challenge is just a pointless slack.

Real life examples:

1. I am discussing politics with an ESTJ acquaintance. He wants to become a politician and speaks with great determination and enthusiasm of various reforms that could be implemented through the democratic apparatus. Meanwhile i'm trying to prove that the whole political system is an obsolete ad-hoc superimposition on a self-replicating memetic organism, and that going into politics would be futile (as i say this i am aware that he doesn't really care about improving the world but only about appearing like someone who does, and equally aware that he is completely incapable of ever realizing this). Instead i advocate introspection as the only means for a person to enact true positive change.

2. I am discussing politics with an INTJ friend. We both agree that current feminism is flawed, but this opinion emerges from entirely different patterns in us. I am primarily concerned with what i perceive to be the core error - the assumption of psychological likeness between the sexes, contrary to feasible expectation by the principle of evolution - while he is primarily concerned with the many disproportionate claims made by feminists and how their accumulation indicates a perverse ideological entity. Furthermore, i am compelled to explore doubts as for the efficacy of activism and campaigning in general, while he remains agnostic about that and just criticizes this particular instance.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
330 Posts
Ti will say that communism is flawed because of the misconception of fair. What is fair. Fair is actually giving everyone a chance to do better for themselves .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,725 Posts
I have a INTP (Ti dominant, in other words) friend who does A=E all the time. He thinks B, C and D is too obvious to point out. Kind of like how you don't explain why 1 + 3 = 4.
i do that all the time, but its because ive already thought about it, and then i cut out some details and forget that people arent in my head so i have to explain it and then it gets bleh
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
26 Posts
Hi people, I join the thread! I don't really know neither if I use Te or Ti (if some of you are able to tell me if I'm ENTJ or ENTP, let me know, please!). I just add my thing to the thread :

Example of a math problem - let's say probability - :

The final answer is 0.8
If one person takes the correct method, learnt in class, where he uses 4 pages to demonstrate the result and gets to the result
If an other one takes a different method, based on "practical thinking" and demonstrates, with validity, the same result.

Which one do you choose?

This way of thinking looks like Te, imo.

PS : I'm french so dont get bothered by grammar mistakes, that's life (try to write in French, we will see ^^)
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,664 Posts
Ti: I have a problem... Let me take a closer look... Closer! Even more closer! Okay... So, should I twist it? Maybe I can add this or remove that one to make it work... Hey! Listen! Did you hear? Something just moved inside of it!

Advantages:
*Doesn't require any external resource for guidance.
*Improvising the most efficient method with make it up as you go along attitude.
*Providing opportunity for discovering the undocumented aspect of things.

Disadvantages:
*Losing time and wasting resources by rediscovering the obvious.
*Ignoring the exceptional yet critical knowledge about details.
*Confusing an instrument with the goal to achieve.

Te: I'm experiencing a problem... Let me step back and analyze a blueprint about the basics of it's operation. So, I can understand how it should and also shouldn't work to decide which approach would be the best solution for this situation.

Advantages:
*Broader vision with the long term perspective.
*Efficiency with a result-oriented approach.
*Patience and discipline with a selfless standpoint.

Disadvantages:
*Lack of personal interest and motivation.
*Dependency on various external references about every single variable.
*Limitation with already accepted/proven methods and their practical requirements.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
415 Posts
Generally speaking, I think Te users want other people to get to the point of a thought quickly rather than explaining step by step how/why they got there (opposite of Ti users). I'm not sure if this assumption is correct though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ae1905

·
Banned
Joined
·
16,000 Posts
Watch the first two minutes of this video. Malcolm X is using Ti and the guy grilling him is using Te. The Te user wants to know Malcolm's name. He keeps on beating him over the head with objective standards. "Is that your legal name?" Continuing to appeal to objective standards that get to the point of what his name actually is. It is an objective fact that he was born a certain name, his father was, etc. But Malcolm X goes into a whole "What is in a name?" routine and dissects every part of the objective standard.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
548 Posts
To be somewhat hyperbolic, Te in a debate on gun control would cite statistics and other data, whereas Ti would wonder if guns really exist at all or if they are just mental constructs.
I notice this all the time in debates, I am a heavy Ti user who doesn't process data well: Dom Ni. I'd rather analyze ideas than bring up statistics, which I then also have to pore over to make sure that study was set up well, reputable sample size and so forth. it's v time consuming as a debate process. I do this sort of thing for work but in internet conversations it's obnoxious & fatiguing.

I can't see how a Te and a Ti user could get along for any extended period of time. but people say that some of their best friends are x type, I guess m-b isn't everything.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,243 Posts
Suppose they are clearing the forest for a housing development...

Extraverted Thinking - Directs the clearing of the forest for the development on the basis of efficiency.
Introverted Thinking - References the principles of ecology to analyze the impact of the development.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
207 Posts
But isn't it different with auxiliary function? I mean, people who use Se are generally considered as more practical so when thinking about ideas the first thing they would like to know is how to apply them in real world. (I think here about XSTPs).
 
1 - 20 of 38 Posts
Top