# Inferior Ti vs. Inferior Si



## counterintuitive (Apr 8, 2011)

*What are some key differences between Inferior Ti and Inferior Si?*

I've already read Naomi Quenk on Inferior Ti and Inferior Si.

Both ENPs and EFJs show an aversion to _"too much detail"_ and "too much detail" being a stressor that pushes them towards the inferior function and associated stress. Any type of detailed work is definitely a huge stressor for me at work.

 So what are some key differentiators?

*
Edit:*

On second thought, perhaps the inferior Ti one doesn't mention details as a stressor as much as I thought. Really there's one significant mention:



> Female ENFJs often mention *dealing with details*, general disorganization, and lack of recognition as quite stressful. One cited “*details, proofreading—routine detail tasks*,” and another, “*plowing through detail*” as sources of work stress.


There's a couple other mentions saying that ESFJs may enjoy/excel at tasks requiring systematic attention to detail - but that's a positive thing to recover from stress.

Whereas the inferior Si one mentions details a whole lot - to the point where I'm not even going to quote them as you might as well just read it.


----------



## counterintuitive (Apr 8, 2011)

*What are some ways in which inferior Ti could be mistaken for inferior Si, or vice versa?*


----------



## counterintuitive (Apr 8, 2011)

counterintuitive said:


> *What are some ways in which inferior Ti could be mistaken for inferior Si, or vice versa?*


Could one realistically confuse inferior Ti and inferior Si? If so, how so? Any thoughts?

:anyone:


----------



## myst91 (Sep 9, 2014)

counterintuitive said:


> *What are some key differences between Inferior Ti and Inferior Si?*
> 
> (...)
> 
> Whereas the inferior Si one mentions details a whole lot - to the point where I'm not even going to quote them as you might as well just read it.


I don't bother with the naomi quenk stuff anymore. It's not bad but I can't really see it going along a consistent enough model of anything. 

I can say this much, my ENFJ friend tells me she feels cold and finds reasons to break off contact with people (and actually does so) when she gets into inferior Ti. Though, in my opinion, with many of those people she shouldn't have wasted so much time on them anyway.


----------



## myst91 (Sep 9, 2014)

counterintuitive said:


> Could one realistically confuse inferior Ti and inferior Si? If so, how so? Any thoughts?
> 
> :anyone:


Like Si-dom and Ti-dom you mean? Lol


----------



## Doc Dangerstein (Mar 8, 2013)

... for starters Si is an irrational function, Ti is rational. The details Si concerns itself with are perceptions, facts within themselves, unattached to any logical or ethical system. They are stupid little things like making a second cup of coffee because you misplaced the first and can't remember if you carried your intent to make coffee or only thought about making coffee. This happens more than i would like to admit. Or tedium of providing sufficient examples and backing evidence for your papers. Or saying you want more evidence for something when everything you have is already conclusive. Or you can't remember pointless, stupid facts like what you had for dinner last night, or how much money you have in the bank, or the details of your schedule because you can't bother to pay attention to such things. I tell you, my ISTJ/ISFJ coworker has better understanding of what goes on in my life than I do and she's anything but nosey.

Ti is about following a logical argument. I don't have a problem with that when I'm stressed. I thought I was ENTP at one time and sometimes I love to play fast and loose with logic and constructs hypothetical garbage.

My mom does thing where she freaks out and insists that her argument is right, and there is no argument other than her argument, and it's right because she's given it some thought and goes on saying her logic is never wrong. Think of it as dogmatic logic incapable of seeing different perspectives and fallacies in its reasoning. Mom's ENFJ, enneagram 2 I might add. She's always looking for some truth, always wanting to get to the bottom of something.

Then I happen remind her of Godel's incompleteness theorem. She rants how everything most neatly add up, 2+2=4 and never 5. I tell she it can make 22. She tells me to shut it and stop philosophizing. And it's late, and I'm telling stories but I hope the do make some sense.


----------



## PaladinX (Feb 20, 2013)

Obsessive/negative thinking vs hypochondria.

As for the Quenk quote, having to attend to details is a stressor for N types in general.


----------



## counterintuitive (Apr 8, 2011)

myst91 said:


> I don't bother with the naomi quenk stuff anymore. It's not bad but I can't really see it going along a consistent enough model of anything.


Eh, I think the core of Quenk's stuff is consistent enough with Von Franz (and by extension, Jung to some extent) and builds on it in an accessible way. But then, Quenk also added a bunch of basically NTR fluff into each article, e.g. stuff like "exercise helps" and "report snapping at people under stress". As a result, each article is both over-relatable (people who don't have that inferior function can relate to it) and under-relatable (people who have that inferior function won't be able to relate to some of her specific examples and such).



> I can say this much, my ENFJ friend tells me she feels cold and finds reasons to break off contact with people (and actually does so) when she gets into inferior Ti. Though, in my opinion, with many of those people she shouldn't have wasted so much time on them anyway.


That's interesting, I was talking to an Fe-dom here who said something sort of similar in type-me video. That does sound like inferior Ti.



myst91 said:


> Like Si-dom and Ti-dom you mean? Lol


Lol, yeah, but I think these are actually more difficult to confuse. At least for me, I've read them all and there's a rather significant pattern as to which ones I relate to :crazy: (Basically inferior Si, somewhat to inferior Se (mostly the sensitivities and projections, which are largely common to inferior S), and to ~30% of inferior Fe. Then not at all to the rest.)



PaladinX said:


> Obsessive/negative thinking vs hypochondria.
> 
> As for the Quenk quote, having to attend to details is a stressor for N types in general.


But hypochondria is a form of negative thinking. As is the rumination on negative possibilities/potential occurrences characteristic of inferior Ne for example.

I think your latter sentence is correct, but perhaps moreso for dominant intuitives rather than auxiliary intuitives, hence the emphasis on sensory details stuff in both inferior S articles.


----------



## Sour Roses (Dec 30, 2015)

@Gilly ... thoughts? If you feel like it.


----------



## myst91 (Sep 9, 2014)

counterintuitive said:


> Eh, I think the core of Quenk's stuff is consistent enough with Von Franz (and by extension, Jung to some extent) and builds on it in an accessible way. But then, Quenk also added a bunch of basically NTR fluff into each article, e.g. stuff like "exercise helps" and "report snapping at people under stress". As a result, each article is both over-relatable (people who don't have that inferior function can relate to it) and under-relatable (people who have that inferior function won't be able to relate to some of her specific examples and such).


That's a problem yes.

But I also don't see how it shows whether it's really your inferior complementing your dominant or just another similarly weak function.




> That's interesting, I was talking to an Fe-dom here who said something sort of similar in type-me video. That does sound like inferior Ti.


Yeah it makes some sense to me too.




> Lol, yeah, but I think these are actually more difficult to confuse. At least for me, I've read them all and there's a rather significant pattern as to which ones I relate to :crazy: (Basically inferior Si, somewhat to inferior Se (mostly the sensitivities and projections, which are largely common to inferior S), and to ~30% of inferior Fe. Then not at all to the rest.)


Lol, I was kinda jk.

I relate somewhat to inferior Fe though not to some of the more important points in the article. Slightly relate to inferior Ni and Ne as well. That's about it.


----------



## counterintuitive (Apr 8, 2011)

myst91 said:


> That's a problem yes.
> 
> But I also don't see how it shows whether it's really your inferior complementing your dominant or just another similarly weak function.
> 
> I relate somewhat to inferior Fe though not to some of the more important points in the article. Slightly relate to inferior Ni and Ne as well. That's about it.


Well, it does talk about going to the inferior under stress and that exhibiting certain tendencies characteristic of that inferior function. That would not occur with a weak function other than the inferior, except possibly the tertiary. I have weak Fi crazy but I don't relate to the inferior Fi article and I don't experience the same stress reaction as ExTJ. I have no signs of moving towards Fi under stress. But some of the other parts, like sensitivities and projections, would apply with any weak function. So that is still a problem.


----------



## PaladinX (Feb 20, 2013)

counterintuitive said:


> But hypochondria is a form of negative thinking. As is the rumination on negative possibilities/potential occurrences characteristic of inferior Ne for example.


To clarify my intended meaning: negative focus on thinking/critical judgments vs negative focus on sensations.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

Spastic Origami said:


> ... for starters Si is an irrational function, Ti is rational. The details Si concerns itself with are perceptions, facts within themselves, unattached to any logical or ethical system. They are stupid little things like making a second cup of coffee because you misplaced the first and can't remember if you carried your intent to make coffee or only thought about making coffee. This happens more than i would like to admit. Or tedium of providing sufficient examples and backing evidence for your papers. Or saying you want more evidence for something when everything you have is already conclusive. Or you can't remember pointless, stupid facts like what you had for dinner last night, or how much money you have in the bank, or the details of your schedule because you can't bother to pay attention to such things. I tell you, my ISTJ/ISFJ coworker has better understanding of what goes on in my life than I do and she's anything but nosey.
> 
> Ti is about following a logical argument. I don't have a problem with that when I'm stressed. I thought I was ENTP at one time and sometimes I love to play fast and loose with logic and constructs hypothetical garbage.
> 
> ...



I agree with this but Si is a quasi judging function in that it reduces things to the binary. Jung said so. Sensation is essentially bound by reason and cannot reconcile opposites. Si and Ti are VERY close because of this. They are both introverted "sorting" functions. I have seen one person particularly always mistake Si for Ti.


----------



## PaladinX (Feb 20, 2013)

FearAndTrembling said:


> I agree with this but *Si is a quasi judging function in that it reduces things to the binary. Jung said so. Sensation is essentially bound by reason* and cannot reconcile opposites. Si and Ti are VERY close because of this. They are both introverted "sorting" functions. I have seen one person particularly always mistake Si for Ti.


Eh? Can you cite the source please?


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

PaladinX said:


> Eh? Can you cite the source please?



*But this dual character of real and unreal is inherent in the symbol. If only real, it would not be a symbol, since it would then be a real phenomenon and therefore removed from the nature of the symbol. Only that can be symbolical which embraces both. If altogether unreal, it would be mere empty imagining, which, being related to nothing real, would be no symbol.*

*The rational functions are, by their nature, incapable of creating symbols, since, they produce only a rational product necessarily restricted to a single meaning, which forbids it from also embracing its opposite. The sensuous functions are equally unfitted to create symbols, because, from the very nature .of the object, they are also confined to single meanings which comprehend only themselves and neglect the other. To discover, therefore, that impartial basis for the will, we must appeal to another element, where the opposites are not yet definitely divorced but still preserve their original unity. Manifestly this is not the case with consciousness, since the whole nature of consciousness is discrimination, distinguishing ego from non-ego, subject from object, yes from no, and so forth. The separation into pairs of opposites is entirely due to conscious differentiation ; only consciousness can recognize the suitable and distinguish it from the unsuitable and worthless. It alone can declare one function valuable and another worthless, thus favouring one with the power of the will while suppressing the claims of the other. But, where no consciousness exists, where the still unconscious instinctive process prevails, there is no reflection, no pro et contra, no disunion, but simple happening, regulated instinctiveness, proportion of life. (Provided, of course, that instinct does not encounter situations to which it is still unadapted. In which case damming up, affect, confusion, and panic arise).*

*It would, therefore, be unavailing to appeal to consciousness for a decision of the conflict between the instincts. A conscious decree would be quite arbitrary, and could never give the will that symbolic content which alone can create an irrational settlement of a logical antithesis. For this we must go deeper ; we must descend into those foundations of consciousness which have still preserved their primordial instinctiveness ; namely into the unconscious, where all psychic functions are indistinguishably merged in the original and fundamental activity of the psyche.
*

blah blah blah. It takes unconscious perception or intuition.


----------



## myst91 (Sep 9, 2014)

counterintuitive said:


> Well, it does talk about going to the inferior under stress and that exhibiting certain tendencies characteristic of that inferior function. That would not occur with a weak function other than the inferior, except possibly the tertiary. I have weak Fi crazy but I don't relate to the inferior Fi article and I don't experience the same stress reaction as ExTJ. I have no signs of moving towards Fi under stress. But some of the other parts, like sensitivities and projections, would apply with any weak function. So that is still a problem.


Yes it mentions that but then it mixes in too much other stuff as you say.


----------



## myst91 (Sep 9, 2014)

FearAndTrembling said:


> I agree with this but Si is a quasi judging function in that it reduces things to the binary. Jung said so. Sensation is essentially bound by reason and cannot reconcile opposites. Si and Ti are VERY close because of this. They are both introverted "sorting" functions. I have seen one person particularly always mistake Si for Ti.


What you quoted does not claim that Sensing is a Judging function.

It's simply that T and S have it in common that they both are pretty concrete in a sense. 

It does not make S a judging function or a function that uses rational reasoning.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

myst91 said:


> What you quoted does not claim that Sensing is a Judging function.
> 
> It's simply that T and S have it in common that they both are pretty concrete in a sense.
> 
> It does not make S a judging function or a function that uses rational reasoning.


It does when you consider what makes reason reason is the dichotomy. The selection process. Reasoning processes select. So does sensing.

An example would be zeno's paradox. Ni would be without entropy. It doesn't consume or create disorder. It is purely abstract. It can use things without touching them.


----------



## myst91 (Sep 9, 2014)

FearAndTrembling said:


> It does when you consider what makes reason reason is the dichotomy. The selection process. Reasoning processes select. So does sensing.
> 
> An example would be zeno's paradox. Ni would be without entropy. It doesn't consume or create disorder. It is purely abstract. It can use things without touching them.


I don't see Sensing as selecting anything rationally. It sees what it sees and what is not there it does not see but that is not rational selection. Irrational functions are not selective, they accept everything they perceive for what it is and that's precisely why they are irrational.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

counterintuitive said:


> Well, it does talk about going to the inferior under stress and that exhibiting certain tendencies characteristic of that inferior function. That would not occur with a weak function other than the inferior, except possibly the tertiary. I have weak Fi crazy but I don't relate to the inferior Fi article and I don't experience the same stress reaction as ExTJ. I have no signs of moving towards Fi under stress. But some of the other parts, like sensitivities and projections, would apply with any weak function. So that is still a problem.


My problem with Quenk is that she takes Jung's original model which is meant to describe deep psychological neuroses and then applies to to an everyday kind of stress logic, so instead of describing how deeply neurotic people are like, it describes how people who are just stressed out in general are like. I don't quite follow how she makes this jump, personally.

Have you ever read the article Shadow-boxing with Fight Club? It describes how inferior Se manifests in great detail (also sensation in general as it draws on the Beebe model) but only when you are a deeply neurotic individual. Obviously the psychological circumstance of the narrator in the story doesn't apply to most people; you can't describe that as a general or generic kind of stress. I mean, symbolism aside, that guy literally splits his own personality in two. 

Either way, the article analyzes how inferior Se (and to a degree, Si) can manifest as we plunge into increasing levels of unhealth at which point some of this makes way more sense. Just being stressed out in life in general, though? I don't know. I mean, I am terrible at paying attention to detail and I relate to some portions of the inferior Se description like how I can get hung up on irrelevant physical details in ways other people just don't give a damn for, and I especially relate to the bingeing portion and perhaps some when it comes to expressing anger as physical violence or how to put it. The most recent example I can think of is probably when I met that avatar set for myself and NH and there was this one line in mine that bothered me to no end and I ended up remaking the whole thing so I could delete it. NH didn't even notice or care, lol. 

But I mean, these things while very cookie cutter examples don't really fill up my life, not in ways that I notice that they do, anyway (outside of maybe the fact that everything physical object I own eventually just seems to naturally deteriorate as if my touch is death itself or something). So I feel like Quenk's descriptions end up exaggerating the occurrences in which they actually occur. When I've been stressed out, I can either excessively clean my home but I can also just lie in my bed and do nothing or surf the internet in order to occupy my mind. At some level I don't think these coping mechanisms are necessarily related to the inferior function but are traits all of us can manifest when stressed out.


----------

