# Why do you think Te is so horrible PerC?



## Sixty Nein (Feb 13, 2011)

[No message]


----------



## surgery (Apr 16, 2010)

> Let's see how bad you guys fuck this one up. Give me your reasons.












But, seriously, why would anyone post their true thoughts or feelings on a thread where OP clearly has his mind made up about the potential responses and obviously intends to "shoot people down" for their "ignorance" ?


----------



## LostFavor (Aug 18, 2011)

I'll give you one that I'm quite familiar with from myself: Without caution, Te can steamroll rationalize in a way that looks really compelling and convincing... but also completely misses the point. 

Because to truly break things down in an analytical way, Te actually has to zoom in on the trees a bit, rendering it somewhat blind.

For example, if I want to rationalize not exercising, I could come up with some great reasons: I don't have a lot of energy right now, I ate somewhat recently, I'm caught up in posting on PerC. Without perspective, some of these look like solid reasons.

But they miss/ignore the bigger picture: If I don't have energy then I can get a quick snack, eating somewhat recently has never actually caused me problems with the exercising I do, and my physical health is more important than an internet forum.

In essence, Te is really good at obscuring information that would shift its claims to something unsupportable, often without the Te user realizing what's happening.


----------



## tangosthenes (Oct 29, 2011)

surgery said:


> But, seriously, why would anyone post their true thoughts or feelings on a thread where OP clearly has his mind made up about the potential responses and obviously intends to "shoot people down" for their "ignorance" ?


Because they shouldn't be that impressionable and get scared by someone disagreeing with them in a forum?

Te is horrible because even though it is good over a wide variety of cases, it sucks balls dealing with/appreciating the individual's logic(aka logic that treats one of the cases in the wider variety more deeply and comes up with different answers for it).


----------



## surgery (Apr 16, 2010)

tangosthenes said:


> Because they shouldn't be that impressionable and get scared by someone disagreeing with them in a forum?



That's so stupid. I'm not "scared" to disagree with a person on a forum. That's totally different from knowingly engaging in a conversation with someone who's belligerent and expects you to "fuck up."


----------



## tangosthenes (Oct 29, 2011)

surgery said:


> That's so stupid. I'm not "scared" to disagree with a person on a forum. That's totally different from knowingly engaging in a conversation with someone who's belligerent and expects you to "fuck up."


Why is it different?


----------



## Kazoo The Kid (May 26, 2013)

I feel like this same exact thread has been made about every function.

What is with people and this "wah wah everyone hates my function" victim complex?

I promise no one really cares.


----------



## LostFavor (Aug 18, 2011)

Kazoo said:


> I feel like this same exact thread has been made about every function.
> 
> What is with people and this "wah wah everyone hates my function" victim complex?
> 
> I promise no one really cares.


Don't knock it. 

It's a great way to clear up some of the misconceptions that people thrust into function discussions, due to bad experiences with people of a particular type.


----------



## Potne Theron (Nov 10, 2013)

As usual and as for any other function, the way a Te user is fucked up depends on their integration of the opposite pole, here: Fi. If Te users have not sufficiently integrated Fi, they live their life according to what Jung called a "rigid formula" to which everything is measured, accepted or rejected as in or out.


----------



## Agg Herbor (Jun 30, 2013)

I guess I'll slightly bite. Can't exactly say I'll fuck it up though.

Te is all about logical practicality. "Is it true? Does it matter? Does it matter to me? Does it matter to me right here, right now?" Musing for the sake of musing isn't on the list of priorities for Te. Te wants to get shit done, understand the objective facts of situation or concept, and looks toward empiricism in an almost dogmatic fashion.

My problem isn't necessarily with Te, but with arrogant douchey Te-users who think subjective logic is a bunch of rabbit-out-the-hat bullshit. If something isn't empirically verifiable, it's useless. And as an Fe-Si-Ne-Ti user, that just doesn't compute. That isn't to say I don't respect strong Te, i just don't necessarily value it like the xxTJs do.


----------



## feeg1 (Feb 12, 2014)

I don't think it's bad, but it's bad points to ME are the general stuborness and not caring for unpractical things.


----------



## tanstaafl28 (Sep 10, 2012)

Oh, not again!


----------



## Abraxas (May 28, 2011)

Trick question.

Real talk, it's actually the best function.



Also, ya'll need to chill the fuck out and roll with it. If you're taking threads like this seriously _you're_ the one who is taking MBTI too seriously.

Just saying, yo.


----------



## surgery (Apr 16, 2010)

tangosthenes said:


> Why is it different?


The difference lies in the fact that people, rightfully in my opinion, use tone of voice as well as other cues to indicate intention. Intention, in turn, is very good indicator of whether something will be a constructive/positive experience or an abrasive, one-sided experience from which there is no growth for either party involved. 

Simply disagreeing with a person on a forum does not mean that everything about the opposing opinions of factually WRONG, nor does it mean that either party "fucked up" in terms of their thinking. For example, if someone wrote in a thread, " Fe-doms make decisions based group harmony and will say or do anything to keep the peace in a social situation, even if it conflicts with their values. I know this because my sister is an ESFJ and she tells white lies to her friends all the time. " Now, imagine that someone writes in response that they are or know an ESFJ who is very honest will tell her friends if she doesn't like her new haircut, dress, etc. This person also suggests that Fe-doms actually tend to reason based on an individuals understanding of the best way to manage relationships, which can manifest in various types of behaviors depending on the culture that Fe-dom grew up in.

In this situation, no one should have been "scared" to enter into a conversation about the nature of Fe. But, if the OP of the thread had said, "I know you hate Fe, so tell me why, you fucktards, and I'll prove you wrong" then that changes the nature of the situation in my opinion. The person who said that her ESFJ sisters seems dishonest may not of have thought she's "horrible", nor did she hate her. Rather, she had some (arguably) misinformation and made a (arguably) poor conclusion about Fe as a function. Now, what if that same person had seen OP's aggressive tone and thought, "Well, I don't hate Fe. It just bothers me sometimes. Plus, this guy sounds like an asshole. Definitely not going to post here…" Is this person too "impressionable' and "scared" Or does s/he just have good discretion? 

The way that OP structured this tread does not create the same kind of environment that encourages discussion. Rather his words indicate someone who is presumptuous, arrogant and only interested in attacking people. It suggests that OP is not seeking to potentially learn something about Te-users or non-Te users alike, including the fact that most people probably don't think Te is horrible. For those reasons, one quickly gets the sense that engaging with this person is going to be troublesome than is worth. Worth here is obviously a subjective term that includes how any given individual values their own time and effort. Perhaps you think it's worthwhile to argue with a stranger on the street who aggressively advocates a radical, apocalyptic view of the near future. But, for many other people, given all prior experiences of people who have advocated similar views that haven't turned out to be true, arguing with such a person is a very obvious waste of energy, emotion and time. One could consider this to be too emotionally-sensitive or "impressionable", which is the word you used. I disagree, however. I think it's a completely rational way to decide the intentions of another person and the likely outcome of engaging with them.

Here's a similar example:

Imagine someone on the street, yelling "TELL ME WHY YOU THINK ISLAM IS HORRIBLE. I CAN'T WAIT TO HEAR YOU FUCK UP YOUR REASONING."
As I pass by, I think to myself, "Although I am not Muslim, I know that I've been open-minded enough to take some college level courses in religious history to learn more about how Islam is and has been understood. I know that there were many things about Islam that I misunderstood and many things about my own culture that I had never considered until taking those courses." Then, a random person chimes in, "Well, I heard the Prophet Muhammad was a pedophile" to which defendant loudly and angry gives a long winded response is that Muhammad was a very loving husband, that the person who asked the question is stupid and ignorant person and begins espouse the importance of the oneness of God and the inevitable fate of Hellfire for everyone who renounces belief God and very rigid interpretation of what how he intends humans to live on Earth.

In this situation, nothing of value is learned. Instead, people who ask questions are quickly shot down as stupid and a dogmatic view is angrily forced upon them with out the person learning about other people's experience of reality either. It makes one wonder, why didn't the person who wanted to advocate the value of Islam tell people about how there's no single interpretation of Sharia/Islamic "law"? Why didn't he talk about the ambiguous factors surrounding marriage during that period of history? Why not make a comparison between Islamic interpretations and Why not try to show people that passages from the Qur'an are frequently taken out of context and misunderstood by media. And, most importantly, why scold the average person for not knowing all the facts already? Many people hear all sorts of things about Islam, just like many Muslims living in predominantly Muslim countries hear all sorts of things about people of different religions or about "the West". Does that fact that most people don't spend an intensive amount of time investigating every thing they hear make them "impressionable"? If they meet a person of another religion and politely discuss their beliefs, but neither of them converts to the other does that mean they were scared? Is this still true if the person who initiated the conversation overtly assumed that most Muslims hate Christians and their reasoning is fucked? Were they "scared" or just wise enough to know that this person is an instigator, not an enlightener, thus not worth their time?

Personally, I do think that the world would be "a better place" if people were more curious about other people's cultural differences. However, I think that a taking a critical tone about potential misunderstandings will only do more damage. For most people, their culture provides what they need so well that they don't need to devote much time to theorizing about potential alternatives or higher truths…so, are they terribly people. Does the fact that they are emotionally attached to something familiar to them make them dumb and deserving of scathing criticism on on an online forum? In my opinion, no. 

If OP really wanted to have an insightful conversation in which he gives people some useful insight, why not ask: "What are your negative experiences with Te-users?" and likewise: "Do you have any positive experiences?" and "What factors might be contributing to the negative experiences?" In this situation, people don't feel the need to avoid a conversation with this person--not people who really do dislike Te-users, nor people who may have a few complaints, but certainly don't think it's any worse than some other question. For this reason, many different people are exposed to many different types of views.  As far as this thread goes, OP seems to assume that there's definitely isn't anything wrong aboutTe-users and that it must people everyone else's false that they misunderstood a person who using a type of mental reasoning that is probably completely foreign to them. The content of OP's posts suggests that he cannot wait to arrogantly insist that all negative experiences with Te-doms MUST ACTUALLY HAVE HAPPENED BECAUSE THE OTHER PERSON IS A DUMBASS, HERE'S WHY." Likwise, it also ignores the fact that there are several other threads on forum that deal with hate for other function. "Why do people hate Fe?" Why do people hate Fi?", etc. So, to assume members of this community as collectively seeing Te has "horrible" and then telling them how dumb they are to think so is baseless and shows that OP's thread will probably be immature and unconstructive. 

So, I just personally don't think that avoiding a conversation because the person intends to frame the situation in a black and white terms is a bad idea at all. It's true that sometimes, people can learn something very valuable from angry or arrogant or defensive people. However, there are certainly many times where this is not that case. Thus, I don't believe it's an indication of one's poor character to learn to avoid or engage with people by trying to assess their intentions.


----------



## tangosthenes (Oct 29, 2011)

surgery said:


> The difference lies in the fact that people, rightfully in my opinion, use tone of voice as well as other cues to indicate intention. Intention, in turn, is very good indicator of whether something will be a constructive/positive experience or an abrasive, one-sided experience from which there is no growth for either party involved.
> 
> Simply disagreeing with a person on a forum does not mean that everything about the opposing opinions of factually WRONG, nor does it mean that either party "fucked up" in terms of their thinking. For example, if someone wrote in a thread, " Fe-doms make decisions based group harmony and will say or do anything to keep the peace in a social situation, even if it conflicts with their values. I know this because my sister is an ESFJ and she tells white lies to her friends all the time. " Now, imagine that someone writes in response that they are or know an ESFJ who is very honest will tell her friends if she doesn't like her new haircut, dress, etc. This person also suggests that Fe-doms actually tend to reason based on an individuals understanding of the best way to manage relationships, which can manifest in various types of behaviors depending on the culture that Fe-dom grew up in.
> 
> ...


Generally, the way I expect forum threads to be approached is as "this guy asked a question. people are going to come in here and give their opinions, some of which are reasonable, and some of which are wrong, it is up to me to input my/observe others' information and decide that for myself." So I don't expect people to come take things personally...since it's a public forum. Hence it must be that the person is emotionally involved... and maybe narrow-sighted in your case? In the sense that you see it as an individual interaction as opposed to a group one. I don't know what it would be. Or maybe just not curious enough to bypass. But you say not scared. I'll chalk it up to you having a function I don't have in the forefront, because it seems like one of those Grand Canyon-sized gaps.

Yeah, I hate people who act like a wall of questions with no give and take, as well. Still, though...plenty to learn by the question. If people get all emotionally focused then you just throw the cat out with the bath...or whatever the analogy is.


----------



## LostFavor (Aug 18, 2011)

Basically, when you've got a public forum to work with, who started the topic and what the topic post is only matter as much as you let them matter to you.


----------



## Kingdom Crusader (Jan 4, 2012)

I don't think Te is bad, but I do think there's such a thing as there being "too much of a good thing".


----------



## Coburn (Sep 3, 2010)

Agg Herbor said:


> Te is all about logical practicality. "Is it true? Does it matter? Does it matter to me? Does it matter to me right here, right now?" Musing for the sake of musing isn't on the list of priorities for Te. Te wants to get shit done, understand the objective facts of situation or concept, and looks toward empiricism in an almost dogmatic fashion.


Te users (particularly Te-doms) can look dogmatic because they're inclined to make decisions with the knowledge they have and "move on." 

Most Te users aren't necessarily uncompromising in their opinions/beliefs; it's just that they need a hefty amount of new, unaccounted for evidence before they're willing to consider changing things up. It's not usually a matter of stubbornness, more one of efficiency.

Also, sometimes Te "dogmatism" is really just Fi. They can look alike when not examined.

As to "musing for the sake of musing..." yes and no. Te users aren't just Te users; they do have three other cognitive functions. 

As an Ne user, I'm happy to muse on certain things for the hell of it. I don't necessarily need some useful outcome to be realized in order to appreciate speculation.


----------



## surgery (Apr 16, 2010)

tangosthenes said:


> Generally, the way I expect forum threads to be approached is as "this guy asked a question. people are going to come in here and give their opinions, some of which are reasonable, and some of which are wrong, it is up to me to input my/observe others' information and decide that for myself." So I don't expect people to come take things personally...since it's a public forum. Hence it must be that the person is emotionally involved... and maybe narrow-sighted in your case? In the sense that you see it as an individual interaction as opposed to a group one. I don't know what it would be. Or maybe just not curious enough to bypass. But you say not scared. I'll chalk it up to you having a function I don't have in the forefront, because it seems like one of those Grand Canyon-sized gaps.
> 
> Yeah, I hate people who act like a wall of questions with no give and take, as well. Still, though...plenty to learn by the question. If people get all emotionally focused then you just throw the cat out with the bath...or whatever the analogy is.



I don't really see how this being a public forum makes a difference. Like I posted earlier, I imagine a person in a crowded public area. The things s/he says will still be understood personally, especially when considering the way in which s/he speaks, i.e. tone of voice, etc. So, why would an online, yet still public, forum be any different? Obviously, people have the right to freedom of speech, but I just think it's infinitely wiser to be tactful. But, yeah, we can chalk our differences in opinion up to type.


----------



## Coburn (Sep 3, 2010)

Asian_Chick said:


> I don't think Te is bad, but I do think there's such a thing as there being "too much of a good thing".


How dare you!?!?! D:< You can never have too many cookies!


----------



## Coburn (Sep 3, 2010)

Although I don't find Te horrible, I do find that it isn't always the best thing for certain tasks. The primary one I can think of being the "sympathetic listener."

When someone comes to me with a problem, my natural inclination is to tell them how to solve it (Te efficiency applied with love). Unfortunately, that's not what most people want; they're looking to vent to someone who recognizes and acknowledges their pain.

Te is not so good at that. 

Although I've gotten better over the years (with LOTS of practice), it's very, very, VERY easy for me to put my foot in my mouth when I'm in that position. It's never intentional-- I don't actually want to make the person MORE upset. 

I guess it's just best to say that the "sympathetic listener" role is not one that naturally falls in line with a Te-dom's strengths (or at least this Te-dom's strengths). 

So while Te isn't horrible...it isn't suited for everything.


----------



## Octavian (Nov 24, 2013)

Petition to end all dumbass threads of this nature that really just serve as open mic stages through which types tear down functions they don't like to comfort their own ego.

+1


----------



## Kingdom Crusader (Jan 4, 2012)

marlowe said:


> how dare you!?!?! D:< you can never have too many cookies!


lol


----------



## beth x (Mar 4, 2010)

Agg Herbor said:


> I guess I'll slightly bite. Can't exactly say I'll fuck it up though.
> 
> Te is all about logical practicality. "Is it true? Does it matter? Does it matter to me? Does it matter to me right here, right now?" Musing for the sake of musing isn't on the list of priorities for Te. Te wants to get shit done, understand the objective facts of situation or concept, and looks toward empiricism in an almost dogmatic fashion.
> 
> My problem isn't necessarily with Te, but with arrogant douchey Te-users who think subjective logic is a bunch of rabbit-out-the-hat bullshit. If something isn't empirically verifiable, it's useless. And as an Fe-Si-Ne-Ti user, that just doesn't compute. That isn't to say I don't respect strong Te, i just don't necessarily value it like the xxTJs do.


That's a really good summation. 

Respect from a Te aux (with developed Fi).


----------



## LostFavor (Aug 18, 2011)

Octavian said:


> Petition to end all dumbass threads of this nature that really just serve as open mic stages through which types tear down functions they don't like to comfort their own ego.
> 
> +1


Remind me, whose ego is looking for comfort?


----------



## Octavian (Nov 24, 2013)

LostFavor said:


> Remind me, whose ego is looking for comfort?


Yours.


----------



## LostFavor (Aug 18, 2011)

Octavian said:


> Yours.


Opacity: 0%.


----------



## stargazing grasshopper (Oct 25, 2013)

I don't like having a Te function that's much greater developed than other functions because it's like having a ruthless inner critic. An overbearing critic upon my shoulder that incessantly analyses everything I do, critiques whatever I say or write & causes me to edit most everything thought not good enough. Lately nothing is good enough, most everything gets extensively edited or deleted.

I think that my perception is that Te constitutes a blend of external analysis & the battle to guide my conscience.


----------



## Kabosu (Mar 31, 2012)

Like all of the judgment types, they come to conclusions too quickly because they don't know how to process without a conclusion of judgment.
When they get defensive, frankly they can seem constipated.
Their logic bores me and seems unoriginal to me at times.
I only really admire in Te that it's more about getting the result and probably is actually a lot more concise than Ti, though I find Ti way more interesting and useful.
If we were as dogmatic as some are with new and challenging information, everyone would still swear today that the earth is flat.

I don't dislike a lot of people who use it or even have it dominant, but it's prone to problems and me explaining things through Ti becomes a wary pain to talk about.


----------



## Khiro (Nov 28, 2012)

tangosthenes said:


> Because they shouldn't be that impressionable and get scared by someone disagreeing with them in a forum?


I think s/he's talking more about time-wasting than bladder-quaking.


----------



## Word Dispenser (May 18, 2012)

Te has the tendency to like efficiency and getting straight to the point. That's well and good, and tends to be helpful and works best in the real world. 

But, I prefer to meander, take my time when I'm thinking over things, and generally tend towards a relaxed state while going through daily affairs. I don't like being pushed into action, or prodded into finding just one, 'best' answer-- The most efficient and 'best' way. This is what Te _can _do, that I don't like. Se can also do this, albeit in a different way.

There are many, many exceptions, and it's not fair of me to say that this is universal among Te ego types. Still, in _theory, _that's what I dislike about Te. And coupled with Fi, you have a very stalwart, stubborn figure. At least, on the surface.


----------



## Erbse (Oct 15, 2010)

Because it ain't Ti, obviously :mellow:


----------



## -Alpha- (Dec 30, 2013)

Word Dispenser said:


> Te has the tendency to like efficiency and getting straight to the point. That's well and good, and tends to be helpful and works best in the real world.
> 
> But, I prefer to meander, take my time when I'm thinking over things, and generally tend towards a relaxed state while going through daily affairs. I don't like being pushed into action, or prodded into finding just one, 'best' answer-- The most efficient and 'best' way. This is what Te _can _do, that I don't like. Se can also do this, albeit in a different way.
> 
> There are many, many exceptions, and it's not fair of me to say that this is universal among Te ego types. Still, in _theory, _that's what I dislike about Te. And coupled with Fi, you have a very stalwart, stubborn figure. At least, on the surface.


I was in a supermarket once with an ENTP friend when I asked him how he viewed the people that work there. He referred to a girl saying "I think about her and how she connects to the rest of the store. She could be here in any capacity" and then proceeds to name the various ways in which she could benefit it. Afterward he asks "why? How do you see her?"

"Uh... As some chick who can help me get my shit?"

Personally, I can see how both sides would be irritated with one another, though, obviously I tend to be biased toward the Te side.


----------



## Belladonne (Mar 22, 2014)

I imagine a _lot_ of people hate Te because of bad experiences with EXTJs (both Te dominants) to be honest. We're relatively rare, but if you meet one of us, you'll notice, and some (probably all, when sufficiently pissed off) can be steamrollers. We're also common in the workplace (especially as managers/leaders), which is not the best environment in which to meet someone you just want to get away from. (Although I'd like to think my Fi is sufficiently developed that that isn't always the case for people )

Btw, OP, another obvious thing is that there are more Feelers in the world, especially SFs (even on here. It's somewhat human and natural - if not entirely rational - to hate what's different.


----------



## Kabosu (Mar 31, 2012)

Not all Te dom are really that bad; I pretty much singled it out in my previous post.
I think a lot of people can be a bit annoyed when a dominant function is almost unchecked by an auxiliary, particularly people who don't value the functions.
I like the less pretentious ones, for example. Still, some of them think there's an obvious answer for roughly everything when I simply don't agree.

Lots of T ego types have a certain wit to their humor which I find cool.


----------

