# How could someone who is dumb and pleasure-seeking still have dominant/auxiliary Ti?



## MD_analyst (Jan 29, 2018)

I've noticed that most people agree upon xxTP for certain TV show characters that aren't necessarily considered smart, intellectual, or curious like most dominant/auxiliary Ti users tend to be. For example, there seems to be a general consensus that Charlie Harper from Two and a Half Men is ESTP rather than ESFP, and Reese from the show Malcolm in the Middle is also typed as ESTP over ESFP, even though he's dumb AF and makes most of his decisions based on what brings him pleasure, with almost no interest in using his head. 

So this makes me wonder...what does a dumb Ti user really look like? If someone lacks intelligence and doesn't seem to use any logic when making decisions, why/how would such a person still have dominant/auxiliary Ti?


----------



## wums (Nov 25, 2013)

Being a thinker doesn't mean someone is smart, being a feeler doesn't mean someone is dumb. Also Ti can look dumb at times because it's inward thinking, it's not on display so they might be doing a lot of 3d chess internally making tons of considerations automatically and just have a blank stare/look unaffected. Ti is always looking at all the deep implications of some logical consideration and not just steamrolling through problems out in the open like Te. 

Ti just means you process internally via systematization of data, doesn't mean you're necessarily intelligent or that your systems are accurate/effective/insightful/whatever. There are a lot of Ti users that give off a vibe of being "dumb," a lot of ESTPs have that vibe just because they are extremely casual. Think of Trump or dubya before him. Well a) being smart or dumb is not type related and b) appearing dumb does not necessarily equate to being dumb.


----------



## Crowbo (Jul 9, 2017)

Lmao! Still relying on stereotypes huh? Go back to type school pleb. You've still got very much to learn


----------



## Stevester (Feb 28, 2016)

1) Ti (or Te) doesn't automatically = smart. It's just judging functions that are slave to the user's so if the user is messed up so will they as well. 

2) Se loves to push boundaries, it just does. An immature STP type may have strong Ti but still have this tendency to have Se speak over it and thus not look before it leaps

3) NTPs are typically known more as _''thinkers''_ in literal sense because Ne is very mental. They can still be dumb as bricks. Sheldon Cooper from TBBT for instance. Says the most stupid and random shit on top of his head. Him being considered a _''genius''_ is purely subjective and 99% of the time, he's the one to make that claim.

4) There are may mature and sharp STPs out there. They are borderline super human, able to totally improvise in the heat of any situation and come out of it winning, whether it be a salesmen making a ridiculously unlikely sale or a paramedic who saves someone's life against all odds due to quick analytical thinking and action.

5) Fictional works prefer the stereotypical jock/dumbass or relentless lady's man ESTP stereotype because those characters just write themselves. ISTPs on the other hand tend to be extremely sharp and resourceful in fiction, so they have nothing to complain about.


----------



## shameless (Apr 21, 2014)

It’s not always that they are stupid

Charlie Harper is a dick, but not stupid
I understand his general mission (getting laid) would likely be stupid to most
He obviously as a character does not have a lot driving him
He really is not stupid despite being a dick.
He is just content in his lifestyle and does not challenge himself outside of what he has attained which is the ability to float 

If he were an ESFP in my opinion he would be a lot more innocently happy go lucky. You can see his Ti because he has a very dark grasp on reality through his subjective Ti, and Se. Hence that exploitative characteristic you see. 
He actually is showing you he has Ti
Why because he is being so practical 
That doesn’t mean his character is high
But he is pretty practical 

He is not ESFP because he is using Ti & Fe 

Not Fi & Te
We never hear him use either of those
He doesn’t give a fuck about a moral, cause, or data just in itself

Now Reese
Reese is also using Ti
I agree Reese has a lot of air head moments
He is not conventionally intelligent 
But he does show signs of intelligence 
Just not in very humane or distinct conventional ways
Reese tends to be acting first always (Se) but then he is usually more set on his objective. That is Ti. 

Both of those examples are shallow uses 
But the reality is
Se users are prone to being viewed as Shallow
It does not mean Ti is not used
Ti is internal so it often will not be externally spotted


----------



## Handsome Dyke (Oct 4, 2012)

All human beings seek pleasure, and all human beings use logic to make decisions, regardless of whether you are aware of their reasoning or consider their decisions wise. Using logic just means using some kind of reasoning, not using some specific type of reasoning.


----------



## Pastelle (Dec 12, 2016)

As already mentioned, thinking does not mean smart. Jungian Thinking (Judgement in general) is about labeling data. Idea creation, planning, decision making, etc, is an amalgamation of all the functions and then some (Higher functions warrant more attention from the individual). I.e, ESTP, the "dumb" type. Se as a dom function, is quite resource, it's main focus is impact, what can be done now with what is at hand. Secondary Ti (thinking) doesn't really say "this is a good idea" but just analyzes the "blueprints" of what Se brings to the table. This is a pretty neutral description of what I gave of Se, but as with all functions, can be used with idiocy or genius. Idiot Se user: Drunk Frat boy, Genius Se user: Macgyver. As for a dumb thinking type, I'd imagine someone who's head is so far up their ass (or mind) that they fail to take into account other info: That stuck-up professor that ignores the worthwhile solution just because it doesn't fit the model.


----------



## Thunal33 (Oct 22, 2018)

Stupid actions might be justified from the Ti user's bad logic, and Ti can still be easily influenced by the user's biases. Just because a person values logic doesn't mean they are any good at using it.


----------



## ivegotthemunchies (Nov 17, 2018)

Ti is just a way to processs and understand things. Not all Ti/Te on the first function stack are smarter. 

I have an Entj coworker, she's really good at talking. She's very assertive and good at making plans generally speaking. But her actual work is crap. 

In the outside, people who doesn't know the work will say he's intelligent and smart, but once they check her output, it's not that flexible at all. 

Do not be deceived. Everyone wants to be a thinker only because they think being a thinker validates your intelligence. But people like ESFJ are intelligent too. 

I had an ESFJ coworker and he's really good at creating documents. I'm bad at it, and he always corrects me, and i learn something from him. 

We just have different kinds of intelligence and not only because one is dumb on some thing, he's not good at anything.


----------



## MD_analyst (Jan 29, 2018)

Sensational said:


> Reese is also using Ti
> I agree Reese has a lot of air head moments
> He is not conventionally intelligent
> But he does show signs of intelligence
> ...


I understand being a thinker by no means equates to being smart-- I was just trying to see how it plays out in people who make decisions based on what will yield the most self-gratification and pleasure, which is usually how people like Charlie and Reese make their decisions. Charlie, I can see more clearly the practical side the more I think about how he pursues his actions, but for Reese...I still have trouble seeing him using Ti to accomplish anything. Is it that he uses whatever limited understanding he has (i.e., superficial use of Ti) to make things work the way he wants? How would his recklessness and impulsive actions look different if he was using Fi?


----------



## ANAXEL (Feb 16, 2017)

MD_analyst said:


> I understand being a thinker by no means equates to being smart-- I was just trying to see how it plays out in people who make decisions based on what will yield the most self-gratification and pleasure, which is usually how people like Charlie and Reese make their decisions. Charlie, I can see more clearly the practical side the more I think about how he pursues his actions, but for Reese...I still have trouble seeing him using Ti to accomplish anything. Is it that he uses whatever limited understanding he has (i.e., superficial use of Ti) to make things work the way he wants? How would his recklessness and impulsive actions look different if he was using Fi?


I can only speak about Reese as that's what I know the most. Keep in mind that, as a fictional character, he's pretty contradictory.
I think he's DEFINATELY an ESFP overall though. No, not because he's stupid (thought he's actually shown to be pretty smart in some areas like most Malcom in The Middle are). Also, both Ti and Fi users can be mainly driven by self-gratification, but just approached differently.
But I think people may type him as an T type because he's mainly mean and violent, which fits a stereotype about T-types.
T types can be nice, they can be dumb. F types can be pretty sharp, they can also be REALLY mean.

Reese is mean, but why? It seems that he's being subjected to the bully stereotype and may feel that that's his identity and the only way he's validated as a person. He mainly feels oppressed and his violence is in response of feeling stepped on by others unfairly rather than a need to be above others because of insecurities. He really only wants to be himself but is afraid that he'll be ridiculed and judged by others.
I think one of the best examples of his Fi showing is when he bought the entire box of caterpillars. He gave them names, was super protective over them and pretty much adopted them, not even once it going through his head how he could use that for practical jokes. He never really had that in his agenda unless it was to get the attention of someone, which is typical of aux Fi.
Another good one is when he befriends and becomes one with a pack of dogs.
When he thought that Malcolm was gay, he bought him a gay-porn tape and actually watched the whole thing because he wanted to know that it was gay enough for him, a great example of how Fi works (a very ridiculous, cartoonish one, but a good one nonetheless).

Fi and Ti can behave similarly. The reasons behind the behavior is usually where we can distinguish them.


----------



## Falling Foxes (Oct 19, 2016)

MD_analyst said:


> I understand being a thinker by no means equates to being smart-- I was just trying to see how it plays out in people who make decisions based on what will yield the most self-gratification and pleasure, which is usually how people like Charlie and Reese make their decisions. Charlie, I can see more clearly the practical side the more I think about how he pursues his actions, but for Reese...I still have trouble seeing him using Ti to accomplish anything. Is it that he uses whatever limited understanding he has (i.e., superficial use of Ti) to make things work the way he wants? How would his recklessness and impulsive actions look different if he was using Fi?


Having personal motivations isn't an attribute of feeling.

Since we're working heavily with stereotypes:

Immature/"stupid" Ti can look like the bully, prankster, jackass.

Immature/"stupid" Fi can look like the "blonde" airhead/ditz, selfish primadona, puppy dog.

Plus a thousand more tropes, but I don't have time to think of them all or list them all.

Both can be rebellious. Immature Ti focuses on breaking rules for the sake of rules being stupid. They challenge for the sake of enjoying provoking someone. Immature Fi focuses on breaking rules because they feel suppressed by them. They challenge because they feel personally at threat.


----------



## Stevester (Feb 28, 2016)

Falling Foxes said:


> Immature/"stupid" Ti can look like the bully, prankster, *jackass*.


Key word here: Jackass. Like the actual show?

I'm sure a lot of people would type them all as SFPs because only SFPs can be that bold and stupid at the same time, amirite? But I'm convinced most of the are actually TP types. 

I can totally see their thought process being curious about how things work and what will happen if they do this....so let's try it out. Worst case, it'll make people laugh (lower Fe). If anything, a Fi might find those stunts degrading and unbecoming to them, with lower Te chiming in about how stupid this is.

So case closed on Ti users being natural geniuses.


----------



## Falling Foxes (Oct 19, 2016)

Stevester said:


> Key word here: Jackass. Like the actual show?
> 
> I'm sure a lot of people would type them all as SFPs because only SFPs can be that bold and stupid at the same time, amirite? But I'm convinced most of the are actually TP types.
> 
> ...


Yeah, like the show. And that was my reasoning too for them being Ti over Fi.


----------



## Reila (Jan 17, 2017)

ANAXEL said:


> Fi and Ti can behave similarly. The reasons behind the behavior is usually where we can distinguish them.


If only more people realized this... Fi and Ti have more in common than otherwise. It is kind of funny seeing people who tend to follow their own ideas/beliefs etc always typed as Fi because of the whole Fi is selfish thing, when the person could very well be a Ti-dom. The major difference is the thought process/how the individual reaches a conclusion between Fi and Ti.


----------



## MD_analyst (Jan 29, 2018)

ANAXEL said:


> both Ti and Fi users can be mainly driven by self-gratification, but just approached differently.
> ….
> Fi and Ti can behave similarly. The reasons behind the behavior is usually where we can distinguish them.


Would it be accurate to say that when an Fi user and Ti user are both doing the same thing-- pursuing the same activity for the sake of pleasure and self-gratification-- the difference is that the Fi user's reasons for wanting the self-gratifying activity are based on having personal favorability for the self-gratification itself (i.e., I want to feel free and happy, so I'm going to party and get drunk), while the Ti user's reasons are based on having personal understanding of how they can use the activity to achieve self-gratification (i.e., "I want to party and get drunk because based on my understanding of drinking and partying, I know it can make me feel awesome" <--- an example of unhealthy Ti, due to the bad logic here)?

But it seems hard to tell which of these reasons underlie a person's motivation for doing something, (I guess that's why they are both "introverted" thinking/feeling), but would some helpful hints of a Fi user include: a stronger expression of their emotional responses when pursuing something; rebelliousness to rules that would interfere with their personal happiness and/or identity; greater concern for preserving an identity/personal well-being?

While hints of a Ti user include: a more noticeable scheming, mischievous behavior; having a stronger tendency to purposely rebel against rules just for the sake of rebelling; are more focused on preserving their own freedom rather than an identity or well-being, since they find their pleasure more from being free to do as they please (they find their self-gratification from bending the rules just for the sake of bending them to stay free/unconstrained, and not for the sake of preserving their identity/emotional well-being, which is a manifestation of them utilizing their personalized understanding --aka their Ti-- to achieve pleasure and self-gratification)?


----------



## Pastelle (Dec 12, 2016)

To me, it is the perception functions that really give people the "why" behind their behaviors while the judgement gives the "what" to it (a bit counterintuitive but I'll elaborate). Perception is the pursuit, the actual focus on the assets of the world. Sensing wants the experiences and intuition chases the concepts (note that I did not include concrete or abstract). Judgement tacks on what those things actually are. Thinking leads one to impersonal categorization while feeling imbues value (I did not say morals or logic!). Lost train of thought when I went to get a drink! Dammit.


----------



## ae1905 (Jun 7, 2014)

everyone has Ti just as everyone has a face, but Ti is no more necessarily intelligent than faces are necessarily intelligent looking

indeed, there are stupid Ti users just as there are stupid faces

this forum, for example, is not without examples of the former


Ti is a faculty (cognition)....intelligence, otoh, is a _quality _of that faculty and can be present in varying degrees, from high to low, just as faces can be smart or stupid


----------



## Zidane (Sep 9, 2015)

A Ti user can look like a complete dumbass, because alot of the thinking happens internally. It's similar to why an Fi user can appear cold, even though they're fuzzy on the inside. So an Ne/Ti user looks like a goofball (like the insectoid above), while an Se/Ti user looks like a jock/jackass (generally speaking). It's the Te'ers who tend to have a more rational appearance/demeanor. However, when we do extravert our T many people are often surprised as fuck. It's really funny. I especially had this problem when I was in my teens. I rarely extraverted my T and many people literally thought I was an idiot (because of my generally wacky behaviour which I couldn't stop myself from doing even if I tried, bane of Ne existence), even though I was actually "smarter" than them. Now, I do it much more (confidence probably) plus it's also more developped. These same people might feel a bit intimidated now I suspect.


----------



## Drecon (Jun 20, 2016)

I think it's a lot more common than people think. The lower IQ Ti-users just don't tend to make the same impression that high IQ Ti-users make. 

For example: I have an ENTP student with a quite low IQ (he can't help it, that's just how he was born). It takes a lot of effort to explain things to him and he asks questions all the time. Yet, when he eventually understands things, he does have a very fundamental understanding of it. It takes him longer to get there, but he does have this Ti-way of understanding things (as well as the Ne quality of thinking of different options and asking questions to try and find holes in the theory). 
He got the highest grade in his class on math, while he's definitely not the smartest. 

So Ti doesn't mean smart, it's a certain way of structuring information and rules. High Ti-users are good at internally structuring their thoughts and make up abstract systems of rules. That's opposed to the Te-users that use external structuring.


----------



## richard nixon (Sep 14, 2017)

I'm an intellectually disabled ISTJ, so T users can have very low IQ.


----------



## VoodooDolls (Jul 30, 2013)

2cool4school


----------



## ENIGMA2019 (Jun 1, 2015)

Threads like this make me wonder... *grins* nvm.

Charlie was not dumb. How did you come to that determination? 

People may do stupid/off the wall things or are extremely playful/or complete pricks but, making the assumption and judging a book by its cover is counter productive when determining someone's intelligence level. I love people like you : )

Some of the world greatest inventors did not appear conventionally intelligent and yet.... Now, they are deemed some of the most intelligent people of all time. I am sure in certain eras they "looked like dumb pleasure seeking idiots" to outsiders. 

That would be like assuming James Franco is an idiot just because of his on screen/off screen persona/behavior at times. h:


----------



## Aluminum Frost (Oct 1, 2017)

There's smart and dumb people of every type. And people react emotionally to ESTPs because they're loud and can be obnoxious so people label them as "stupid". Even with dumber ESTPs in fiction and whatnot they have an internal logic and it often works but often times they're just not that smart and/or they're missing key information.


----------



## Charus (May 31, 2017)

So a smart or intelligent person can't seek pleasure? Wow, what a typical mindset of a boring person.


----------

