# Is Te the most productive yet least humanistic function?



## TheDarknessInTheSnow (May 28, 2016)

Since some of you (such as a ribbon colored blue) may not understand:

"hu·man·is·tic
ˌ(h)yo͞oməˈnistik/Submit
adjective
relating to or supporting the principles of humanism. relating to or characteristic of the Renaissance humanists."

"humanism- any system or mode of thought or action in which human interests, values, and dignity predominate."


Essentially the question becomes, is Te robotic? My argument is yes.


----------



## Blue Ribbon (Sep 4, 2016)

TheDarknessInTheSnow said:


> You take things too literally and act like you're a Professor of Cognitive Functions,


Did I ever claim that? Why do you think I made a post like this in a public forum? People are free to argue their positions with me and correct me if I'm wrong. 

I will admit, I have a good understanding of the functions because I've been studying them for years. 



> when honestly, a lot of this is open to interpretation and understanding.


I don't think it's 'open to interpretation.' The functions have clear definitions. You can understand them in your own way but you can't just interpret them however you want. 



> For example, when I say "memory" I do not mean literal memories.


You said 'memory of sensation. Your own words. 



> As a Si-dom, you do not need to explain Si to me. I understand it.


And I have Si in my auxiliary position. I understand it well too. You're just using appealing to authority now. 



> And I'm telling you, I do have a memory of sorts when it comes to internal sensations. That's where the impressions come from to begin with.


Okay? 



> I never said no human is capable of remembering sensations. Just like every human is capable of seeing different possibilities and envisioning the future.


Finally, something we agree on. 



> But for an Si-dom, it's much more intense than for others. Overall, Si is relative, which means it does depend on memory.


Define memory please since we seem to disagree on what it means. 



> I did not sit here and try to craft the perfect definition of each function using the perfect words, and for all intents and purposes of my post, I 100% intended on exaggerating the functions, their abilities and generalizing.


If you admit to all this, why do you claim your ideas as fact? 



> It's more poetic to bring life to the functions and allow the readers to follow along.


Okay? 



> I'm sure all of you are capable of contributing and understanding the functions. I'm not writing a textbook here.


Well no one is writing a text book here. 



> Not only that, I don't think you seem to understand the essence of Ti, which is to understand.


I understand Ti perfectly well. It is my aspirational and dual seeking function. 



> To claim that understanding can be subjective is true,


So you agree on the basic difference between Te and Ti. 



> but to sit here and tell me "reality" could only be understood because Te is "external evaluation of reality" (which has no meaning whatsoever) is ridiculous.


Okay - here we go: 

Evaluation of reality. What part of that makes no sense to you? 

I don't understand what you mean by 'reality can only be understood by Te.' Can you quote me saying that because I'm sure I haven't said that. 



> Ti can very well absorb "external" information on the world and evaluate it and come to conclusions,


Of course it can. It's a judgment function! Geez why are you telling me this like you disagree with me? 



> and in a way that is more focused, consistent and accurate than Te.


Yes. Ti focuses on accuracy. It's internalised logic. How can you even pretend I haven't said that many times already? 



> Science and math rely on Ti, which is analytical by definition.


The scientific method by definition is Te. It's the reason that INTJs are called 'the scientists' and INTPs are called 'the engineers.' There is a basic difference between a scientist and an engineer and that is that one works with facts and has very little creative freedom (Te) while the other builds systems (Ti). 



> Again, Te is about judgment, interacting with external setups to get results. Doesn't mean Ti can't come up with those results, establish understanding, and then seek to be just as efficient and able.


Sure. Fe and Fi can do that too - make judgments. 



> It'll just do it in a way that is more internalized and slower. Similarly, Te can actually be inefficient as well, especially if a procedure is set in place and judgment calls for it to be followed. A Ti-user would skip certain steps if it deemed the procedure ineffective. Both can be efficient and focused on reality and yet subjective. So I have to disagree with you here majorly. Ti can also be just as experiment and data-focused as Te.


I don't disagree with anything you said here.



> And "Fe is a reactive function". Well that's what I meant by "expressive" but apparently that didn't float your boat cause "Fi users are more expressive than us any day". Which again, is wrong.


'As dom Fe, you don't need to tell me what Fe is' - your own logic. 



> Fe is expressive and that's why it's focused on harmony-building.


Fe has a lot in common with Te. They both evaluate reality the only difference is that while Te focus on logic, Fe does on ethics. 

Another thing, Fe has a tendency to follow the will of the majority while Fi has a tendency to champion personal sentiments. I used the word tendency. Fi users are more in touch with themselves than Fe users are. I have no issue putting aside my personal feelings for the sake of someone else. Fi users are more expressive in this sense while with an Fe users, it can sometimes amount to putting on a show. 



> Approval is external and it seeks to construct it.


Approval seeking is a trait of enneagram 3. Any type can be an E3. 



> "Fe isn't as conflict-averse blah blah blah" I'd have to disagree with you here. Fe is cooperative.


But you can't, remember? I'm dom Fe. I know more about Fe than you do - your own logic. 

I'm an enneagram 1 ESFJ. I'm probably the coldest, most uncaring INTPish ESFJ you'll ever meet. I use my Fe to create a standard for myself to try and reach. Go against me and there will be hell to pay - is my attitude. I can fairly say that Fe isn't as nice as it's made out to be. If it isn't, how can you explain why so many people hate ESFJs? 



> And by the way, Fi is the most individualistic function. Ti seeks to evolve, to incorporate, to accommodate, to improve. Fi doesn't. I thought that would be obvious to you since you seemed so adamant on informing me that the functions work in pairs (as if I didn't know). Fe-Ti is more about the group than Te-Fi.


You are wrong about this. There is a Ti brand of individualism that has more focus on individual thought and strives to fight groupthink. The people who complain about how reason is more important than feelings, how our communities are full of sheeple that can't think for themselves are Ti users. Does that not sound like individualism to you? 



> Overall, your attitude is honestly offensive.


So I make a long post explaining why I disagree with you and you respond without reading and somehow that's not offensive? Lol okay. 



> Even if you did see a legitimate problem with my wording of the functions or understanding, you could have politely interjected and explained it (and there actually is nothing legitimately or drastically wrong).


Which is what I did and you didn't even read my post fully. I do have a very impersonal way of communication sometimes but there is nothing offensive about the way I posted - at least not the first time. And then you didn't even read that post, and then you responded saying you didn't bother to read it, so that made me mad. 



> I hate nothing more than arrogance, and you exude that. When I said I don't want to argue, I meant I found your post pointless. You're a waste of time.


I'm a waste of time, yet you made a long angry response to my post. Lol okay.

If you are wrong, I will correct you. And if I'm wrong, I should be corrected. I'm not here to make anyone feel nice. So long as I don't use intentionally offensive language or make personal insults, I really don't care that you're offended.


----------



## TheDarknessInTheSnow (May 28, 2016)

Blue Ribbon said:


> Did I ever claim that? Why do you think I made a post like this in a public forum? People are free to argue their positions with me and correct me if I'm wrong.
> 
> I will admit, I have a good understanding of the functions because I've been studying them for years.
> 
> ...


Read the last few lines. Ehh to be honest I'll say it again: you're just a waste of time. I was not drastically wrong. You were looking for a reason to argue and you still do, which is why you leave a comment on every single sentence I write. Like damn, how extra can you get? 

Okay Miss Perfect thanks for leaving your incredible helpful clarifications. The world has changed because of you. I can now sleep peacefully. And you may now exit this thread.


----------



## TheDarknessInTheSnow (May 28, 2016)

Blue Ribbon said:


> I'm an enneagram 1 ESFJ. I'm probably the coldest, most uncaring INTPish ESFJ you'll ever meet. I use my Fe to create a standard for myself to try and reach. Go against me and there will be hell to pay - is my attitude. I can fairly say that Fe isn't as nice as it's made out to be. If it isn't, how can you explain why so many people hate ESFJs?


Enneagram talk caught my eye. INTPs are not cold and uncaring first of all. One of the closest people in my life is an INTP type 3 and she could shred you to pieces (which is not saying much). :exterminate: 

Other than that, E3 is approval seeking? One of the most arguably confident types. E9 seeks harmony the most, and probably E2. 

Stereotypically, ESFJs can be near-sighted and impose their opinions on others. There's also the image of a dumb ESFJ, probably from polr Ni lmao. Don't believe in that assumption, just replying to your question.

Honestly you're just an incredibly unhealthy ESFJ who is using Fe in incredibly devilish ways. I see that a lot in ENFJs and ESFJs. Dom Fe users can be terrible. You didn't learn the right values :wink:

Oh and feel free to leave a post with a reply to each statement! I NEED to know what you think! roud:


----------



## Blue Ribbon (Sep 4, 2016)

"HYPOCRITICAL. No forget socionics and types. I agree with your view and am familiar with socionics theory. Let's focus on the individual function here, which is where you're wrong. To say Ti isn't focused on efficiency is to say Te isn't focused on logic. Both are wrong. Not the main focus, but both involve it to a degree. "

Socionics definition of Ti : 
Ti is generally associated with the ability to recognize logical consistency and correctness, generate and apply classifications and systems, organize systematic and conceptual understanding, see logical connections between things (including logical similarities, differences, and correlations) by means of instinctive feelings of validity, symmetry, and even beauty. It is like common sense, in that it builds on one's expectations of reality, through a somewhat personal, though explicable, understanding of general truths and how they are manifested.

Types that value Ti naturally question the consistency of beliefs that are taken for granted in everyday life. They strongly prefer to make decisions based on their own experience and judgement, as opposed to relying on external authorities for knowledge, which they use only as a last resort. They also have respect for people with clearly defined and internally consistent opinions, believing that a sense of internal certainty is necessary for orienting oneself in life. To these types, one's personal standards of truth are more reliable than public consensus.

They see overly pragmatic views as shallow, and try to limit public discussion of mundane practical matters. They are especially sensitive to redundant information." 

Is there any mention of efficiency here? Of course, you can find any other sites where there will be any mention of it and I'll accept it. 


If anything, there is a mention of them disliking too much pragmatism - which is related to Te. 

Logic is something both Te and Ti focuses on. What kind of logic is the question here. You just made a faulty comparison. 

"Ti can follow the scientific method too. Fe can too. Te is about what works, you don't need the scientific method to be able to find that out. " 

Socionics definition of Te: 

"Extroverted logic is an rational, extroverted, and dynamic IM element. It is also referred to as Te, P, algorithmic logic, practical logic, or black logic (because the symbol is black). Extroverted logic deals with the external activity of objects, i.e the how, what and where of events, activity or work, behaviour, algorithms, movement, and actions. The how, what and where of events would be the external activity of events, activity or work would be the external activity of a machine or individual(s) and algorithms describe the external activity of objects." 

It isn't just about what works. 

These aren't just my ideas. They are Socionics definitions. You can't disagree with them because they are facts. 

"Overall, never said Te isn't useful. No, I'd argue it's the most useful in the society we live in. My argument is an ideal society without constructs and the need to "perform" or get results out fast. A society that values the process more than the outcome. I'm sorry if it's hard for you to envision such a society." 

You should have clarified that. You literally said that Te is the most useless function which is false. 
@TheDarknessInTheSnow just to make sure you don't miss it. Also I'm done debating you because this clearly isn't going anywhere.


----------



## TheDarknessInTheSnow (May 28, 2016)

Blue Ribbon said:


> "HYPOCRITICAL. No forget socionics and types. I agree with your view and am familiar with socionics theory. Let's focus on the individual function here, which is where you're wrong. To say Ti isn't focused on efficiency is to say Te isn't focused on logic. Both are wrong. Not the main focus, but both involve it to a degree. "
> 
> Socionics definition of Ti :
> Ti is generally associated with the ability to recognize logical consistency and correctness, generate and apply classifications and systems, organize systematic and conceptual understanding, see logical connections between things (including logical similarities, differences, and correlations) by means of instinctive feelings of validity, symmetry, and even beauty. It is like common sense, in that it builds on one's expectations of reality, through a somewhat personal, though explicable, understanding of general truths and how they are manifested.
> ...


Theory isn't fact. Epic fail when you didn't even understand the premise of this question and the context of the term "useless". By the way I did find a site that mentions Ti efficiency! But since you're leaving, goodbye!!!!


----------



## Blue Ribbon (Sep 4, 2016)

TheDarknessInTheSnow said:


> Enneagram talk caught my eye. INTPs are not cold and uncaring first of all. One of the closest people in my life is an INTP type 3 and she could shred you to pieces (which is not saying much). :exterminate:


I did not say that. My best friend is an INTP and I have a dualised relationship with him. How does that have to do with anything? 



> Other than that, E3 is approval seeking? One of the most arguably confident types. E9 seeks harmony the most, and probably E2.


They are confident. However, they do seek approval. That's why they're so motivated to work hard. I think every enneagram type has a weakness like for 1s it's perfectionism and I've observed a lot of unhealthy 3s being unable to handle failure. 



> Honestly you're just an incredibly unhealthy ESFJ who is using Fe in incredibly devilish ways. I see that a lot in ENFJs and ESFJs. Dom Fe users can be terrible. You didn't learn the right values :wink:


Gasp, a personal insult? Aww you shouldn't have. 

Oh and feel free to leave a post with a reply to each statement! I NEED to know what you think! roud:[/QUOTE]


----------



## Blue Ribbon (Sep 4, 2016)

TheDarknessInTheSnow said:


> Theory isn't fact. Epic fail when you didn't even understand the premise of this question and the context of the term "useless". By the way I did find a site that mentions Ti efficiency! But since you're leaving, goodbye!!!!


I thought we were arguing within the boundaries of the theory. Otherwise I can just make up facts and demand they're right.


----------



## TheDarknessInTheSnow (May 28, 2016)

Blue Ribbon said:


> I did not say that. My best friend is an INTP and I have a dualised relationship with him. How does that have to do with anything?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


[/QUOTE]

Thank you for the, once again, incredibly useful replies!!!!! You really need to stop contributing so much, you're too helpful


----------



## Blue Ribbon (Sep 4, 2016)

Thank you for the, once again, incredibly useful replies!!!!! You really need to stop contributing so much, you're too helpful[/QUOTE]

You're welcome. Just doing what I can to contribute to this forum.


----------



## TheDarknessInTheSnow (May 28, 2016)

Blue Ribbon said:


> I thought we were arguing within the boundaries of the theory. Otherwise I can just make up facts and demand they're right.


You don't make sense. In theory, nothing is law or fact. Everything is open


----------



## TheDarknessInTheSnow (May 28, 2016)

Blue Ribbon said:


> Thank you for the, once again, incredibly useful replies!!!!! You really need to stop contributing so much, you're too helpful





> You're welcome. Just doing what I can to contribute to this forum.


You're doing a great job. Seriously I'm ending this now. We just don't sit well together. Hope you have a great day somewhere not near me! And I mean that  lmao


----------



## Blue Ribbon (Sep 4, 2016)

TheDarknessInTheSnow said:


> You don't make sense. In theory, nothing is law or fact. Everything is open


I give up.


----------



## TheDarknessInTheSnow (May 28, 2016)

If you see this thread please ignore it or don't reply. It's not open for discussion anymore. Thank you.


----------



## myjazz (Feb 17, 2010)

TheDarknessInTheSnow said:


> I feel vastly misunderstood here and I'm actually gonna stick to my original claim. Ti can be efficient, just as much as Te. And Ti can improve systems much better than Te.


Efficient has nothing to do with one Function. Every Function is efficient in it's own way


----------



## Parrot (Feb 22, 2015)

@TheDarknessInTheSnow I appreciate the argument you're trying to make it's just unnecessary. All functions are necessary in their own regard.


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

Seems a little biased on the Si/Fe side off the fence


----------



## tinyheart (Jun 17, 2016)

TheDarknessInTheSnow said:


> Sorry but I'm not reading all that.  I disagree with 2 things:
> 
> 1. I think Ti is more about logic than Te
> 2. Si is related to memory, memory of sensations. Every sensation felt now is relative.
> ...


You're not using Te by doing that. You're using rude. Straight up rude.

If you care so much about Ti, read what Bibbon just wrote, make an objective analysis (which means don't dismiss/ignore something just because you're lazy or afraid of being wrong), and then (without being in your feels) comment on what she said, expand on it, BACK UP your opinion with facts. 

Oh wait, there's more..........yeah read that and gotta say that you need to learn more about the functions before you post again on this topic. And by learn more I mean read, and OBSERVE. Observe people on here, preferably for a few months, then go ahead and make an objective post. Anyways, leaving this thread foreverrrrr~~~


----------



## tinyheart (Jun 17, 2016)

TheDarknessInTheSnow said:


> If you see this thread please ignore it or don't reply. It's not open for discussion anymore. Thank you.


Not happening, darling. Not until you ask a Mod to close it, methinks.


----------



## TheDarknessInTheSnow (May 28, 2016)

mytinyheart said:


> You're not using Te by doing that. You're using rude. Straight up rude.
> 
> If you care so much about Ti, read what Bibbon just wrote, make an objective analysis (which means don't dismiss/ignore something just because you're lazy or afraid of being wrong), and then (without being in your feels) comment on what she said, expand on it, BACK UP your opinion with facts.
> 
> Oh wait, there's more..........yeah read that and gotta say that you need to learn more about the functions before you post again on this topic. And by learn more I mean read, and OBSERVE. Observe people on here, preferably for a few months, then go ahead and make an objective post. Anyways, leaving this thread foreverrrrr~~~


Rude? Yes. Did I start it? No.


----------



## TheDarknessInTheSnow (May 28, 2016)

Blue Ribbon said:


> I give up.


After a day, I apologize for taking it too personally and being just as rude back as I felt you were to me. Positive vibes only, see you later. I'm learning more about Te and honestly my whole theory was misguided from the start :happy:


----------



## Stawker (Nov 30, 2016)

TheDarknessInTheSnow said:


> I feel vastly misunderstood here and I'm actually gonna stick to my original claim. Ti can be efficient, just as much as Te. And Ti can improve systems much better than Te. For that reason, I *personally * find Te to be the least humanistic function, and probably the most unnecessary. Please respect my opinion cause I'm no longer interested in expanding my framework on this subject and no one here has truly helped evolve my stance or allow greater understanding.
> 
> Te is most good for productivity but only because of quick judgment. Honestly too practical for my liking. Call me biased.


Almost the entirety of philosophy is Ti. And the only thing productive, and hence useful, about philosophy are the 'accidents of philosophy': Science, for an instance, is the product of a philosophy and not a philosophy. Thing is, I respect Ti for what it is; it's excellent for Mathematics; but mental constructions are just mental constructions. I can create a thousand theories about a situation off the bat (like all philosophies of language) and none of them would give us any valuable insight. It's only when I look at things as they are, and then try to see what they stand for, that I can reach something truly insightful (like Wittgenstein's philosophy of language -- Te works here). Reality doesn't depend on logic, logic is dependent on reality. When you follow logic alone, you come up against several paradoxes (discounting factual inaccuracies for the moment) -- raven's paradox, Carroll's paradox (the infinite progression of modus ponens), Drinker's paradox, to name a few. There are also statistical errors which can only be tuned out when you consider 'data'. Logic is linear, reality is not. If the field of logic still exists, it's all thanks to the people who focused on what is rather than what could be. 

Think of it like this: Ti creates the tools (deliberately or by chance, doesn't matter) and Te employs them. In a world without Te, forget logical interaction with reality. There would only be mental masturbation and nothing more.


----------



## myjazz (Feb 17, 2010)

Stawker said:


> Think of it like this: Ti creates the tools (deliberately or by chance, doesn't matter) and Te employs them.


That is basically how I consider Ti and Te.
I also think that Te get's a bad rap due to this compared to Ti. Society looks or focus's more on the Ti aspect that stand's out at certain moment's in time. 


Sometimes when a Te Type think's they are Ti I want to tell them- why, you seem way more intelligent. :laughing:


----------



## Stawker (Nov 30, 2016)

myjazz said:


> Sometimes when a Te Type think's they are Ti I want to tell them- why, you seem way more intelligent. :laughing:


Savage.


----------



## Dragheart Luard (May 13, 2013)

I think that the OP reactions are a good example of being baffled by their PoLR and loving their HA. No wonder that the OP had so much trouble accepting that Te is as useful as other functions. For me, I get that Fe is relevant but still can't avoid to grind my gears, so the key part is to separate personal feelings from the real purpose of a function.


----------



## TheDarknessInTheSnow (May 28, 2016)

Mordred Phantom said:


> I think that the OP reactions are a good example of being baffled by their PoLR and loving their HA. No wonder that the OP had so much trouble accepting that Te is as useful as other functions. For me, I get that Fe is relevant but still can't avoid to grind my gears, so the key part is to separate personal feelings from the real purpose of a function.


Totally agree with the PoLR looking in retrospect. But "loving their HA", what does that mean?


----------



## Dragheart Luard (May 13, 2013)

TheDarknessInTheSnow said:


> Totally agree with the PoLR looking in retrospect. But "loving their HA", what does that mean?


You like Ti way more than Te, as Ti is your Hidden Agenda so is more natural for you to rely on it.


----------



## TheDarknessInTheSnow (May 28, 2016)

Mordred Phantom said:


> You like Ti way more than Te, as Ti is your Hidden Agenda so is more natural for you to rely on it.


Oh okay yeah I do love Ti. With Te PoLR I got defensive when information was presented that contradicts me. I think this is the best example of it manifesting itself in me... I only want information, regardless of objectivity or source, that approves my ideas / expereince and don't know what to do when it doesn't


----------



## Dragheart Luard (May 13, 2013)

TheDarknessInTheSnow said:


> Oh okay yeah I do love Ti. With Te PoLR I got defensive when information was presented that contradicts me. I think this is the best example of it manifesting itself in me... I only want information, regardless of objectivity or source, that approves my ideas / expereince and don't know what to do when it doesn't


Yeah, that sounds like a good example of struggling with facts that don't correlate to your own system. Funny that your own thread helped to confirm your type in the process.


----------



## Blue Ribbon (Sep 4, 2016)

Mordred Phantom said:


> I think that the OP reactions are a good example of being baffled by their PoLR and loving their HA. No wonder that the OP had so much trouble accepting that Te is as useful as other functions. For me, I get that Fe is relevant but still can't avoid to grind my gears, so the key part is to separate personal feelings from the real purpose of a function.


I'm curious as to how ILI relates to Fe. I think that types who are aware of their PoLR overcompensate for it. I was wondering if you do that?


----------



## ninjahitsawall (Feb 1, 2013)

I think Chloe Decker on Lucifer (the one with the doll in the first clip) is an example of a Te user (not sure of exact type) that is necessary to humanity... That's kinda what's entertaining about their dynamic...Lucifer is chaos incarnate lol.


----------



## Blue Soul (Mar 14, 2015)

Blue Ribbon said:


> I'm curious as to how ILI relates to Fe. I think that types who are aware of their PoLR overcompensate for it. I was wondering if you do that?


It's like we're not programmed to consider the emotional environment around us. It makes us say socially awkward or hurting things to people at times. As an ILI ages though, we learn how to adapt to expectations around us. It's often easier not to underestimate the importance other people place on an emotional subject, even if I might not share their perspective at least I can take it into account. So in a way I've learnt to "fake" Fe through observing others as a way to oil up the system so that the machinery runs smoother and my own existence becomes more bearable.


----------



## He's a Superhero! (May 1, 2013)

Just an observation...ENFP/IEE have Te as their third function, and INFP/EII have Te as their fourth function, and both of these are within the "Humanitarian" socionics club. I'm trying to get more insight into how this works exactly...

(A thread discussing the clubs: http://personalitycafe.com/socionics-forum/129441-clubs-secondary-clubs-just-theory.html)

With the assistance of the linked thread...
The Researchers socionics club I hear is considered less focused on people than the Humanitarians socionics club. The "Heavy Researchers" club include the XNTP - ILE and LII, which lack Te in their four main functions. On the otherhand, it is the "Light Researchers" - XNTJ, LIE and ILI - that have a very strong Te presence.


----------



## To_august (Oct 13, 2013)

TheDarknessInTheSnow said:


> Imagine that no tests or pressing deadlines or constraints existed on humanity. Wouldn't Te be the most useless function? It's good for productivity and getting results, but isn't it a bit robotic and systematic?
> 
> In my opinion, the sensing functions are probably the most important functions basic for experiencing a full life. Both introverted and extraverted. A world without Si is like that creepy society in The Giver that lacks memories and the experience of intense internal sensations or need for comfort. Without Se, there is less enjoyment with our physical world and appreciation for sensory experiences / our surroundings. Se also pushes us to experience what life has to offer in a physical sense.
> 
> ...


Pressing deadlines and constraints are not Te. Reason for the majority of issues resulting in pressing deadlines and constraints is poor organisation and a lack of sense of time and events itfp. Te would become useless once you wouldn't have to apply any objective work to anything, or evaluate anything objectively ever. Sure enough it may seem robotic, but neither of the functions is "humanistic" and being Fe/Fi doesn't make you a follower of humanistic principles. Strong Fe/Fi users can be just as cruel and morally nihilistic as any other strong Te type.

Te doesn't make the world animilastic and competitive eather. Certain combinations of functions provide for bigger possibility to result in such mindsets, but it's not Te in and of itself. 

It's understandable that you view the world through the lens of your strong functions, but one of the positive effects functions studying has (on me, at least) is the acknowledgement of that other people may find a use and meaning in functions I consider nonessential, and that all of them are important for development of the society as a whole.


----------



## Dragheart Luard (May 13, 2013)

Blue Ribbon said:


> I'm curious as to how ILI relates to Fe. I think that types who are aware of their PoLR overcompensate for it. I was wondering if you do that?


Dunno if this can count as overcompensating, but I really can't tell when an emotion is appropiate to express or not. Sometimes I get scolded for barely emoting, while for example my mom gets annoyed when I yell too loudly after getting scratched or bitten by one of her cats. Then I also avoid toxic relatives like the pest, as they tend to screw me up after a while. Talking with an aunt left me too anxious and ended crying as I needed to remove that bad feeling from myself soon or it would build up and make the anxiety worse later. I know that she mostly bullshits, but the dramatic way that she expresses herself stresses me so much that I need to vent for relaxing.


----------

