# Which thinking function is best suited to being a lawyer: Te or Ti?



## Angelic Gardevoir (Oct 7, 2010)

I've been told that I'd make a good lawyer. (One of the people who have told me this is an actual lawyer, lol.) I don't want to be a lawyer, but I thought this might provide some insight. I could see how both could be used, but which one do you guys think would be the most important?

(I feel so bad for making so many threads. I feel like I'm annoying everybody. I'm sorry if I am. ^_^U)


----------



## Dark Romantic (Dec 27, 2011)

Ti, because it would do a killer job at picking apart the logical inconsistencies in your opponent's case.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

Yeah, maybe Ti, although I can see cases being made for both (e.g. I've read that IFPs can become very legalistic in inferior Te mode, although I kind of doubt that being a lawyer would bode well with their values much on average).


----------



## Eleventeenth (Aug 24, 2011)

Starting in post #23 of the thread below, @steelbadgers89 gives some good information regarding types and lawyers and the various strengths that are required in the profession.

http://personalitycafe.com/nts-temp...71067-intp-arrogance-vs-intj-arrogance-4.html


----------



## Hapalo (Sep 4, 2011)

I took this from the "Intro to Function Theory + More Detailed Descriptions of Each Function Attitude" thread.

Ti: What logical relationships necessitate this system working the way it does, and how can I make them make sense to me?

Te: What externally verifiable, quantifiable evidence can we show that this is logical, and what tangible goal can be served by spending our time on it?

Both are good but I think Te is better because it is easier to use it to demonstrate your logic to others.


----------



## LiquidLight (Oct 14, 2011)

I think most lawyers are thought of as Te-types (but are really known for their intuitions more than anything). It really would depend on what type of law that was being practiced though. I would think Te-types would probably do well with certain things and Ti-types with others. Law is a very broad subject and I don't think its fair to equate an ambulance chaser with a constitutional law expert. There are also Feeling lawyers out there too (Gloria Allred comes to mind).


----------



## Muser (Jul 17, 2011)

My vote goes to Te.
Much of it is about working with written, agreed-upon laws, and using only what's available. Even if my own reasoning makes great sense, it'd be rejected because it's not officially part of the law. As a Ti-user, that would frustrate and annoy me...and it does.


----------



## TaylorS (Jan 24, 2010)

Law is the embodiment of Te cognition


----------



## Eleventeenth (Aug 24, 2011)

TaylorS said:


> Law is the embodiment of Te cognition


...when used in conjunction with one's intuition.


----------



## Anna Perenna (Feb 11, 2012)

i bet on *Ti *


----------



## wanderingcat (Nov 16, 2011)

I guess it depends on the case. Legal briefs in most cases seem to me to follow a fairly cut and dried format and are not particularly innovative in terms of intellectual reasoning, basically showing how your client's position is correct under existing law, in the most efficient way possible. Seems more like Te to me. In other cases, you do see lengthy and erudite disputes over very fine shades of meaning of particular words as used in statutes etc., which would seem more Ti.


----------



## myexplodingcat (Feb 6, 2011)

@AngelicGardevoir: Your threads always have such good ideas, though!

Ti is really good at picking stuff apart. I played the expert witness in Mock Trial once and ended up with an Honor Witness certificate because I blew apart any possibility of the prosecution's argument having a believable base roud: Doing that was fun, because the other team was from a Catholic school and they were a bunch of aggressive jerks. (Nothing against Catholics. People just send jerky kids there so they'll be controlled better.)

Actually, I'd found that case really confusing for a while because I was trying to read it like a mystery novel and figure out whether or not the defendant actually was guilty, although the case was of course designed so that either side could win if they were persuasive enough. D'oh. INTP trying to be objective.

"Oh... I'm supposed to find arguments for my side. Okay."

Te would know laws better, though. I think that person might make a better judge.

Angelic, aren't you an ENFP? So you would have Te only as a tertiary, right? It's more likely that the qualities that would make you a good lawyer are Ne and Fi: Ne's spontaneity and pattern-seeking, and Fi to plead the morality of certain actions. And you would care. ,'


----------



## pericles (Apr 16, 2011)

*--------- -----**Ti-judge| Te-judge|*
*Te-lawyer* ---Lose---- *|* Win-----* |*
*Ti-lawyer *--- Win -----*|* Lose----* |*
----------------------------------


----------



## LotusBlossom (Apr 2, 2011)

I also vote for Te


----------



## timeless (Mar 20, 2010)

Neither is better. Te and Ti are actually complementary. I'll give an example.

The other day, I was working on a motion for judgment of acquittal. Basically, after the prosecution has presented their case-in-chief, the defendant can move for a judgment of acquittal on the theory that the prosecution did not present evidence sufficient to sustain each element of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt. (Elements are pieces of a charge; for example, the elements for burglary in the third degree would be (1) entering or remaining, (2) unlawfully, (3) in a building, (4) with intent to commit a crime there. If the prosecution provided no evidence that he had _unlawfully_ entered, the defendant can move for acquittal and get it. All elements of a charge have to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.) There are two ways to go about your argument on this one. You can argue that one or more elements simply were not adequately addressed. You can also argue that the meaning of the element is the thing in question; in the above example, you might question if where the guy was standing counts as "remaining" in the statute. There could be endless evidence available to show that he was standing somewhere, you're just disputing that this "somewhere" satisfies the second element.

Generally speaking, the first tactic is more of a Te thing to do, and the second tactic is more of a Ti thing to do. But you shouldn't use just one, if you can help it. A good legal argument covers all possible avenues of attack, and that requires arguments that would be associated with Te, Ti, Fe, Fi...


----------



## Erbse (Oct 15, 2010)

Given how the system currently works, it's Te bar none.

Not that I would mind for Ti ruling the world eventually, but it's doubtful it's gonna happen, and thus you'll find yourself in quite struggle trying to swim against the stream when it comes to 'law' and the supposedly 'fairness' it provides.


----------



## Eleventeenth (Aug 24, 2011)

myexplodingcat said:


> Te would know laws better, though. I think that person might make a better judge.


I think this is where Te would have some advantage, not just for a judge, but for a lawyer as well. As a Ti user, I'd probably have to go back and "re-learn" things every time I had a new case, which would be a lot of legwork. It's not black and white though. It's not like Ti isn't conducive to being a good lawyer. I think it's the combination of T and N that would work best. But, I do think Te is a pretty valuable tool for (a) knowing the law in a very broad way, (b) presenting in a courtroom.


----------



## huiwcleon (Dec 30, 2011)

timeless said:


> Neither is better. Te and Ti are actually complementary. I'll give an example.
> 
> The other day, I was working on a motion for judgment of acquittal. Basically, after the prosecution has presented their case-in-chief, the defendant can move for a judgment of acquittal on the theory that the prosecution did not present evidence sufficient to sustain each element of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt. (Elements are pieces of a charge; for example, the elements for burglary in the third degree would be (1) entering or remaining, (2) unlawfully, (3) in a building, (4) with intent to commit a crime there. If the prosecution provided no evidence that he had _unlawfully_ entered, the defendant can move for acquittal and get it. All elements of a charge have to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.) There are two ways to go about your argument on this one. You can argue that one or more elements simply were not adequately addressed. You can also argue that the meaning of the element is the thing in question; in the above example, you might question if where the guy was standing counts as "remaining" in the statute. There could be endless evidence available to show that he was standing somewhere, you're just disputing that this "somewhere" satisfies the second element.
> 
> Generally speaking, the first tactic is more of a Te thing to do, and the second tactic is more of a Ti thing to do. But you shouldn't use just one, if you can help it. A good legal argument covers all possible avenues of attack, and that requires arguments that would be associated with Te, Ti, Fe, Fi...


I see... But could a lawyer really covers all possible perspectives? A lawyer certainly has to fall in a personality type. Based on the explanation you've given, I would say personality types with Ti or Te as dom would have advantages in being lawyers.


----------



## timeless (Mar 20, 2010)

huiwcleon said:


> I see... But could a lawyer really covers all possible perspectives? A lawyer certainly has to fall in a personality type. Based on the explanation you've given, I would say personality types with Ti or Te as dom would have advantages in being lawyers.


It's part of the job to make your argument in as many persuasive ways as you can come up with. Obviously you don't want to drop an avalanche of information on someone, but a good argument covers as many bases as possible without being overbearing. A failure to do that is just lazy lawyering, since you never really know which argument is going to stick with the jury or with a court. From what I've seen, no type has an advantage in lawyering.


----------



## Angelic Gardevoir (Oct 7, 2010)

myexplodingcat said:


> @ Angelic Gardevoir: Your threads always have such good ideas, though!


Thanks! ^_^



> Angelic, aren't you an ENFP?


 I was never actually sure of that typing. I just went with it. Since I can't pinpoint my F function, maybe I could figure out my T function with this. If it helps, I think the reason I could be a good lawyer is because I'm good at making arguments. (Though maybe that doesn't help at all...) The thing is that I don't find law very interesting, I hate public speaking, and I don't want to deal with the pressure of someone trying to get me to do something unethical just to win a case. (That's not to say there aren't honest lawyers, however.) 



pericles said:


> *--------- -----**Ti-judge| Te-judge|*
> *Te-lawyer* ---Lose---- *|* Win-----* |*
> *Ti-lawyer *--- Win -----*|* Lose----* |*
> ----------------------------------


 That's probably the truth. XD


----------



## myexplodingcat (Feb 6, 2011)

Angelic Gardevoir said:


> If it helps, I think the reason I could be a good lawyer is because I'm good at making arguments. (Though maybe that doesn't help at all...) The thing is that I don't find law very interesting, I hate public speaking, and I don't want to deal with the pressure of someone trying to get me to do something unethical just to win a case. (That's not to say there aren't honest lawyers, however.)


Actually, now that I'm thinking about your type...

You definitely use Ji in some form, and in a strong position--one of your top two. You make a point ("I don't want to... do something unethical just to win a case.") And then you immediately make an exception to that ("That's not to say there aren't honest lawyers..."). This is a Ji flag. So you're a Perceiver. That narrows it down by half.

Don't be fooled into thinking that strong ethics=Fi, though. Ti users have very strong ethics as well--they just have to make logical sense. It's more of an Introverted Feeling thing, though, to say that morals are unique to each person. Ti users are more "Everyone's on the same level, but we're all in different situations"-ish.

So this means you also use Pe in your top two: Se or Ne. Se is difficult to pin down. Most people just say it's sensory awareness, but Lenore Thomson makes the point that it also involves a talent with picking up skills on the job and learning as you go. When Se is combined with Ti, it feels a lot like logical instinct: the kind that tells the basketball player whether to shoot or to pass to a teammate in a better position. Se/Fi-ers will do what feels right at the moment. 

Ne is more cosmic. It might come up with anything. We don't know. Kind of freaky. It always has Ti or Fi to pin down what's unlikely and sweep the absurd ones out the door, though. Ne senses possibilities and patterns, say the typical descriptions. And that's right. It does. But it also works with Ji to figure out what would happen if you expressed a certain opinion, if you changed something in a computer program, or if you started doing the worm in the middle of Wal-Mart. (Told you it comes up with absurd stuff.)

Anyway, I hope this helps with any type trouble. You can always PM me if you want my help, or if you wish me to rummage through my rather unorganized stocks of resources to find something that would pertain to you.


----------



## myexplodingcat (Feb 6, 2011)

Eleventeenth said:


> I think this is where Te would have some advantage, not just for a judge, but for a lawyer as well. As a Ti user, I'd probably have to go back and "re-learn" things every time I had a new case, which would be a lot of legwork. It's not black and white though. It's not like Ti isn't conducive to being a good lawyer. I think it's the combination of T and N that would work best. But, I do think Te is a pretty valuable tool for (a) knowing the law in a very broad way, (b) presenting in a courtroom.


Remember, though: INTPs have Si to work with. It might not be the strongest, but it's one of the preferred functions and it could fairly easily be developed to suit a career as a lawyer. No?


----------



## Eleventeenth (Aug 24, 2011)

myexplodingcat said:


> Remember, though: INTPs have Si to work with. It might not be the strongest, but it's one of the preferred functions and it could fairly easily be developed to suit a career as a lawyer. No?


Well, yeah, but I don't exactly go around looking for careers that will allow me to use my Si all day. I much prefer Ti and Ne. If I wanted to use Si, I'd become an accountant. I know what you're saying - Si would be helpful in law - and I agree with that. I just don't know that it's a motivating factor at the end of the day. Si is kind of boring to me. Well, I guess it depends on the topic. Sometimes I use it heavily and it comes in handy. Other times it's a drag.


----------



## Thorgar (Apr 3, 2010)

Both have their advantages. In a constitutional law argument before the supreme court, you'd probably be better off with Ti. However, in a business dispute, you might prefer Te. I've seen too many Ti using lawyers who just can't let an argument go when their client would be better off with a more practical solution.


----------



## Angelic Gardevoir (Oct 7, 2010)

myexplodingcat said:


> Actually, now that I'm thinking about your type...
> 
> You definitely use Ji in some form, and in a strong position--one of your top two. You make a point ("I don't want to... do something unethical just to win a case.") And then you immediately make an exception to that ("That's not to say there aren't honest lawyers..."). This is a Ji flag. So you're a Perceiver. That narrows it down by half.


I just made that exception so that any lawyers reading this who happen to be honest wouldn't be offended. XD And I think it's more of a defense mechanism for myself as well, since if I state something but not state it as an absolute, it'll protect me from being hurt when discussing things. If I make an allowance that my ideas could be wrong, the blow doesn't sting as much when someone points out something. I'm very sensitive to criticism.



> Don't be fooled into thinking that strong ethics=Fi, though. Ti users have very strong ethics as well--they just have to make logical sense. It's more of an Introverted Feeling thing, though, to say that morals are unique to each person. Ti users are more "Everyone's on the same level, but we're all in different situations"-ish.


I'm not discounting being a T entirely, but is it possible to have anxiety issues and still be a T?



> So this means you also use Pe in your top two: Se or Ne. Se is difficult to pin down. Most people just say it's sensory awareness, but Lenore Thomson makes the point that it also involves a talent with picking up skills on the job and learning as you go. When Se is combined with Ti, it feels a lot like logical instinct: the kind that tells the basketball player whether to shoot or to pass to a teammate in a better position. Se/Fi-ers will do what feels right at the moment.


Yeah, I don't think I'm very good at that. :tongue: 



> Ne is more cosmic. It might come up with anything. We don't know. Kind of freaky. It always has Ti or Fi to pin down what's unlikely and sweep the absurd ones out the door, though. Ne senses possibilities and patterns, say the typical descriptions. And that's right. It does. But it also works with Ji to figure out what would happen if you expressed a certain opinion, if you changed something in a computer program, or if you started doing the worm in the middle of Wal-Mart. (Told you it comes up with absurd stuff.)


If I'm a P, then I'm a Ji-dom based on this alone. While I've loosened up as I've gotten older, as a child I was too restrained to do something like doing the worm in the middle of Wal-Mart. XD



> Anyway, I hope this helps with any type trouble. You can always PM me if you want my help, or if you wish me to rummage through my rather unorganized stocks of resources to find something that would pertain to you.


 Thanks!


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

I'm starting to think that you're an Fi or Fe dom, but I'm not sure which, even though you're normally hard to type.



> I'm not discounting being a T entirely, but is it possible to have anxiety issues and still be a T?


Most definitely. This has nothing to do with T/F at all. T is essentially impersonal logic, while F is essentially humane reasoning. That's fundamentally it.


----------



## Angelic Gardevoir (Oct 7, 2010)

JungyesMBTIno said:


> Most definitely. This has nothing to do with T/F at all. T is essentially impersonal logic, while F is essentially humane reasoning. That's fundamentally it.


 While that may be so, I was thinking that maybe T types could be less affected by anxiety because they look at things more objectively. Or something. :tongue: The Big Five covers that with neuroticism as an extra dimension, however. (I'm not sure how well correlated it is with the MBTI...) But the idea of a T that scores high in neuroticism just seems a bit odd to me. Though I guess it could be possible...


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

> While that may be so, I was thinking that maybe T types could be less affected by anxiety because they look at things more objectively.


Ts can have insecurities about things that they don't understand (since this is a huge part of their conscious focus in life) and also most definitely have insecurities about things in the F realm of existence (social anxiety, etc., since their F side is less conscious in them, so they feel more insecure about it relative to higher F types). Isaac Newton was a very neurotic T type, for instance. How objectively you look at things has nothing to do with these problems. Everyone uses every function in some way consciously (the ways that each function is approached though differs from type to type, based on the conscious priority assigned to it). F types just tend to have inferiority complexes more around logical thinking than T types, since it's less consciously experienced by them, and it's taken pretty seriously in society. Overall though, I've seen every type with this problem or another, since humans, motivationally, are all fairly similar in one way or another. Defense mechanisms have nothing to do with type. They are based on survival instincts due to feeling threatened. Anxiety is a defense mechanism against a perceived threat, regardless of its reality and helps to defend the egos of both T and F types when they feel threatened. Since I read that you seem to have insecurities around saying something wrong or illogical, you're no doubt an F type (probably an F dom of sorts).


----------



## Angelic Gardevoir (Oct 7, 2010)

JungyesMBTIno said:


> Ts can have insecurities about things that they don't understand (since this is a huge part of their conscious focus in life) and also most definitely have insecurities about things in the F realm of existence (social anxiety, etc., since their F side is less conscious in them, so they feel more insecure about it relative to higher F types). Isaac Newton was a very neurotic T type, for instance. How objectively you look at things has nothing to do with these problems. Everyone uses every function in some way consciously (the ways that each function is approached though differs from type to type, based on the conscious priority assigned to it). F types just tend to have inferiority complexes more around logical thinking than T types, since it's less consciously experienced by them, and it's taken pretty seriously in society. Overall though, I've seen every type with this problem or another, since humans, motivationally, are all fairly similar in one way or another. Defense mechanisms have nothing to do with type. They are based on survival instincts due to feeling threatened. Anxiety is a defense mechanism against a perceived threat, regardless of its reality and helps to defend the egos of both T and F types when they feel threatened. Since I read that you seem to have insecurities around saying something wrong or illogical, you're no doubt an F type (probably an F dom of sorts).


That explains it. I guess I was having trouble imagining a T being anxious because Ts usually aren't insecure about the things I'm insecure about. Darn projection...XD


----------



## myexplodingcat (Feb 6, 2011)

Eleventeenth said:


> Well, yeah, but I don't exactly go around looking for careers that will allow me to use my Si all day. I much prefer Ti and Ne. If I wanted to use Si, I'd become an accountant. I know what you're saying - Si would be helpful in law - and I agree with that. I just don't know that it's a motivating factor at the end of the day. Si is kind of boring to me. Well, I guess it depends on the topic. Sometimes I use it heavily and it comes in handy. Other times it's a drag.


Yes, but we've already given several pretty good arguments for INTPs as lawyers: our ability to spot logical inconsistency, for instance, or our love of systems. The point made was that Te users would know laws better, and wouldn't have to look them up, and Si could be developed enough to remedy that. Meanwhile, Ti and Ne are already good at a large part of the job: developing arguments.

Accountant work is more of a Te thing itself. Do you know any ISTJs outside of a work setting? They're drastically different. Si typically seems bureaucratic because it's kind of blocked from view by Fe or Te (and its need for things to be consistent and steady is often satisfied in hierarchy). Actually, Si does question common authority quite a bit--I'm citing Lenore Thomson yet again on this one, because I think hers are the most accurate views. Possibly you're feeling the influence from your inferior Fe and mistaking it for Si, because their definitions are so confused. I could of course be wrong, though.

Why is it a drag, really? There's not really anything about Si that holds INTPs back. It helps us quite a bit, actually, even if Ne is far stronger. (And if your Ne is plenty stronger than your Si, that's really good, because it'll keep you out of dom-tert loops.)

It's hard to compare Te-ers and Ti-ers in something like this, because they're so different that it's hard to relate them to each other, to line them up and juxtapose them so that you can see where one or the other is superior. They won't line up nicely. They work on different planes, in different worlds; specifically, the different worlds of right and left brain. Once you delve into an issue like this, you realize exactly how different the two Thinking functions are, and how silly it is to lump them into one category and then try to use them to type people.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

> It's hard to compare Te-ers and Ti-ers in something like this, because they're so different that it's hard to relate them to each other, to line them up and juxtapose them so that you can see where one or the other is superior. They won't line up nicely. They work on different planes, in different worlds; specifically, the different worlds of right and left brain.


I don't know where you get this stuff that Te and Ti are so different, because this is hardly true, other than their orientations. Most Ti doms would probably go for Te over any of the other functions first, since it is basically the other side of the same coin (the "thinking" coin). I've seen Ti doms that prefer Te to even Ne, due to this relative similarity in world-view (one of logic first), although I'm not suggesting that there's anything universal about this. I'm rather skeptical about most of the brain-hemisphere stuff out there, to be honest, since I've never seen experimental results on it and have seen many opposing claims in my research of this topic.


----------



## myexplodingcat (Feb 6, 2011)

> Since I read that you seem to have insecurities around saying something wrong or illogical, you're no doubt an F type (probably an F dom of sorts).





Angelic Gardevoir said:


> That explains it. I guess I was having trouble imagining a T being anxious because Ts usually aren't insecure about the things I'm insecure about. Darn projection...XD


I don't see where the base for your conclusion comes from. Ti types are constantly on the alert for illogical statements, and our sensitive little egos get bruised if we say something that doesn't make sense logically. In fact, this is why we get nervous talking about something we don't understand. We're afraid we'll say something illogical and make a fool of ourselves.

Seeing the friendly mushroom yet?


----------



## myexplodingcat (Feb 6, 2011)

JungyesMBTIno said:


> I don't know where you get this stuff that Te and Ti are so different, because this is hardly true, other than their orientations. Most Ti doms would probably go for Te over any of the other functions first, since it is basically the other side of the same coin (the "thinking" coin). I've seen Ti doms that prefer Te to even Ne, due to this relative similarity in world-view (one of logic first), although I'm not suggesting that there's anything universal about this. I'm rather skeptical about most of the brain-hemisphere stuff out there, to be honest, since I've never seen experimental results on it and have seen many opposing claims in my research of this topic.


All right. Show me how they're similar in thought process, apart from the broad label of logic. You can work out logic a bunch of different ways. You can look Thinker-ish a bunch of different ways, too. Before I try and explain, show me where you're getting your doubts--I've just put in my first round of two cents, so show me where I'm wrong. Specifically.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

> Ti types are constantly on the alert for illogical statements, and our sensitive little egos get bruised if we say something that doesn't make sense logically.


If you're actually a Ti dom, you shouldn't have an inferiority complex around Ti. And you're not speaking for all INTPs by implying that INTP = sensitive ego. What you're describing is probably ego pride more than an inferiority complex.


----------



## Angelic Gardevoir (Oct 7, 2010)

myexplodingcat said:


> I don't see where the base for your conclusion comes from. Ti types are constantly on the alert for illogical statements, and our sensitive little egos get bruised if we say something that doesn't make sense logically. In fact, this is why we get nervous talking about something we don't understand. We're afraid we'll say something illogical and make a fool of ourselves.
> 
> Seeing the friendly mushroom yet?


I relate to that. Yet I don't think that's exclusive for Ti-doms. No one likes being made a fool of. It's just worse for me because I have bad anxiety when it comes to making any sort of mistake that could reflect on my intelligence. (Practically since I've started school, in fact.) I believe that's more of a reflection of a psychological problem than it is of my type, now that I think of it.

Am I seeing the friendly mushroom? Why don't you ask the guy in my signature if he sees it?

Dr. Tenma: :O (Thinking: WTF is that thing?)
Me: What's the diagnosis, doc?
Dr. Tenma: :O
Me: *waves hand in front of Tenma's face* Are you alive in there?


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

> I don't see where the base for your conclusion comes from. Ti types are constantly on the alert for illogical statements


I doubt that Angelic is *constantly* on the alert for illogical statements from what I've read of her posts so far, although it would be great to have her input on this...


----------



## Angelic Gardevoir (Oct 7, 2010)

JungyesMBTIno said:


> I doubt that Angelic is *constantly* on the alert for illogical statements from what I've read of her posts so far, although it would be great to have her input on this...


 No, not constantly. Just when I see the possibility come up. Or if I'm being tested/assessed somehow. XD


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

Since most lawyers are xSTJs, I would say Te. 

However, I'm sure xNTPs are EXCELLENT BULLSHITTERS. 

So TJs and NTPs probably make the best lawyers.

STJs use Si to memorize all those little facts and to do law research, and uphold the law to the letter. An ESTJ would be incredibly powerful because they would be extroverted to argue, and also have Ne bullshitting as well as Si reference to facts. ESTJs may actually make the most dangerous lawyers for this reason, actually.

It really depends on what you mean by "best" anyway. Do you want some crooked lawyer who bullshits (I sure don't) or someone who is ethical, knowledgeable, insightful, and educated enough on the details to win?


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

P.S.

My mother also told me I'd be a great lawyer, but I patently most certainly would not. I would have Fi shit fits in the courtroom, and my Fi also probably could not take the corruption and bullshit that I've personally witnessed just by sitting in a courtroom for one day, especially combined with what lawyers have said about law school. Jesus, I would die.

But I'm not fit for it, no matter how much I like to argue, have passion for causes and want to win. There's more to a law career than such superficial qualities.


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

Thorgar said:


> Both have their advantages. In a constitutional law argument before the supreme court, you'd probably be better off with Ti. However, in a business dispute, you might prefer Te. I've seen too many Ti using lawyers who just can't let an argument go when their client would be better off with a more practical solution.


Yeah but you could get a weird Te/Fi personal vendetta on the other hand. 

I watched this woman lawyer one day, I'm not sure of her exact type, but she was definitely a Te/Fi or Fi/Te type. Because this bitch wanted to win at all costs, she actually LOOKED scary, and about the defense actually said the words "I'm going to get her."

I looked at this woman and reminded myself of why I shouldn't be a lawyer. 

Of course that lawyer will probably NEVER be a judge. I'm sure her fellow lawyers look at her and see that she's not as unbiased as she should be. 

I bet a lot of judges are IxTJs. Maybe the occasional INTP.


----------

