# Ignoring function in IXTjs?



## Boolean11 (Jun 11, 2012)

Why is it that ISTjs are perceived as generally closed minded to new facts after they've rationalized their perception data, whilst on the contrary INTjs are said to be not? This is an inconsistent bias since the notion theoretically applies to both types. Being subjective logicians both types are stubborn towards the consideration of new facts when they have crafted a framework that satisfies the external perception data they discover. They only reconsider their frameworks if or when comprehensible new perception data violates their logical consistency; When the logical framework is flawed yet appearing to conform to the perception the error is unrecognizable in their weltanschauung. This also applies to IXFjs except with the difference being that their "facts" or sense of "logic" is value based (it had nothing to do with emotions). 




Socionics_ws said:


> *ISTjs*
> LSIs can tend to have rigid, unchanging views that are not updated over time and not stringently evaluated in terms of their applicability in practice. They can sometimes adopt ideological viewpoints that pay only passing attention to, or are modestly unconcerned with the acquisition or application of new or updated factual information.
> 
> *INTjs*
> LIIs usually have little interest in thinking of or implementing practical applications for their ideas. They usually display little interest in how the ideas or structures they produce relate to the outside world; instead, they tend to focus primarily on furthering, building upon, and exploring the implications of their internal systems. They may also tend to have little spontaneous inclination to conceptualize situations in terms of efficiency, expenditure of resources, or pragmatic concerns; instead, they may focus more extensively on philosophical or rational principles and structured codes of living -- though many LIIs are not so austere.





Sociotypes said:


> *ISTjs*
> LSIs can tend to have rigid, unchanging views that are not updated over time and not stringently evaluated in terms of their applicability in practice. They can sometimes adopt ideological viewpoints that pay only passing attention to, or are modestly unconcerned with the acquisition or application of new or updated factual information.
> 
> *INTjs
> *​LIIs usually have little interest in thinking of or implementing practical applications for their ideas. They usually display little interest in how the ideas or structures they produce relate to the outside world; instead, they tend to focus primarily on furthering, building upon, and exploring the implications of their internal systems. They may also tend to have little spontaneous inclination to conceptualize situations in terms of efficiency, expenditure of resources, or pragmatic concerns; instead, they may focus more extensively on philosophical or rational principles and structured codes of living -- though many LIIs are not so austere.





Wikisocion said:


> *ISTjs*
> When in love, the LSI will disregard behaviors that he feels are normal because the partner fulfills those obligations. This is especially apparent when the LSI stops work because there is enough money in the household without the LSIs income.LSIs are annoyed by the idea of continuously updating their core beliefs and systems with new factual information. To the LSI, the truth is the truth, and anyone who brings up real-life examples that, on the surface, seem to contradict the closely held ideas of the LSI, is viewed as an antagonist who must be quelled.
> While an LSI can easily understand isolated factual logic, he greatly prefers to sift through such material in an effort to extract the underlying systematic principles being taught, the information the LSI views as being “the point.” Once the core principle has been absorbed, extraneous factual information is often discarded, a habit which, when taken too far, can sometimes lead to LSIs being unable to back up their beliefs with any real-world examples. Sometimes LSIs will see the wisdom in acquiring this kind of supporting evidence, but their tendency is to pick and choose only those examples that support their positions.
> 
> ...


----------



## Kanerou (Oct 8, 2009)

I suggest looking into Ne-Creative vs Ne-PoLR.


----------



## Boolean11 (Jun 11, 2012)

Kanerou said:


> I suggest looking into Ne-Creative vs Ne-PoLR.


What does that have to do with the topic of the thread? The topic here is the ignoring function


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Boolean11 said:


> What does that have to do with the topic of the thread? The topic here is the ignoring function


Because you started this thread writing this:


> Why is it that ISTjs are perceived as generally closed minded to new facts after they've rationalized their perception data, whilst on the contrary INTjs are said to be not?


Ne vs Se is what constitutes the difference because Ne is more likely to look for new possibilities whereas Se sees what is here and now, meaning the Se type will not look for new theoretical possibilities because to them, the data is in front of them.


----------



## Boolean11 (Jun 11, 2012)

LeaT said:


> Because you started this thread writing this:
> 
> 
> Ne vs Se is what constitutes the difference because Ne is more likely to look for new possibilities whereas Se sees what is here and now, meaning the Se type will not look for new theoretical possibilities because to them, the data is in front of them.


What was also explained was that mutually when "Pe" perception data doesn't seem to violate the Ti framework, the is no reason to alter the given framework for both types.


----------



## cyamitide (Jul 8, 2010)

Boolean11 said:


> Why is it that ISTjs are perceived as generally closed minded to new facts after they've rationalized their perception data, whilst on the contrary INTjs are said to be not? This is an inconsistent bias since the notion theoretically applies to both types.


Because there is intuitive bias in those descriptions. 

ISTjs and ISFjs are creative when it comes to concrete tactics and methods (Se-creative). This is where they are very flexible and spontaneous and where INTjs and INFjs tend to be conservative and follow conventional methods. But because there is intuitive bias in those profiles (which were likely written by other intuitives, Socionics itself was invented by a bunch of N-doms) this isn't mentioned.

The reason that ISTjs may make an impression of being close-minded and dense is due to Ni being their hidden agenda function. Because Ni is their HA, this type attempts to find common principles in ideas, bring disparate topics and agendas together to achieve a unified meaning or understanding. This is what they spend their mental energy on and this is what makes this type be ideologically conservative.



> Ni as mobilizing function of LSI (ISTj; Maxim Gorky) and ESI (ISFj; Dreiser) - the area of self-esteem of these types is the "wholeness" of the internal situation, internal harmony, ideological consistency and consistency of principles, internal tranquility.
> http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/content.php/193-Aspects-in-the-Valued-Functions-Dmitry-Golihov


INxjs do the opposite so _appear to be_ much more open to conceptual exploration. With Ne-creative they easily surf through a multitude of new topics, themes, novelties, ideas, gadgets, etc and make associations between them. Their intuition is also _extraverted (Ne)_ and it's a creative and producing function, so INxj types make their intuitive insights on the fly, in the course of interaction or conversation, making the products of their intuition be readily visible to others. This isn't the case of ISxjs for whom intuition is not only _introverted (Ni)_ but it is also an inert function, so they only receive information on their intuition but can't masterfully display it for others.


----------

