# Ti (subjective logic/facts) & Fi (subjective feelings)



## Wisteria (Apr 2, 2015)

Noir said:


> Te will see that if you press a pedal, the car will start.
> Ti will see that if you press a pedal, it will act upon the engine releasing fuel and so on, it will understand the whole process.
> 
> See the difference? Te is way faster. Ti, on the other hand, is much more accurate, because at the end of the day pressing the pedal might only be an accidental process in the system.


I was saying (/asking) the questions in case anyone got the wrong idea about Te. I think the better way to understand the cognitive functions is to look at what each one values, instead of the introverted/extroverted processes because it leads to overthinking. Find the correct definitions and it is much easier to understand its meaning.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Ksara said:


> The standards that determined the best phone for money?
> Well that was completely in context to what I needed the phone to have, what I needed to use it for, how breakable it would be. I took into account how many megapixels the camera would need for a standardish photo (wasn't blowing up my images), if it had a removable battery (a pain to send it to the manufacture to replace an old battery), also removable battery means removable back. That means when dropped the force will break the weakest point being the back coming off rather than the screen. I avoided a front camera as I wasn't paying to not take selfies. The phone had to fit comfortably in my hand, and also needed a setup I though was easy to navigate.
> There was more to that list.
> 
> ...


Yes, I think your process is typical for most people, however: 



> I don't quite understand, if it should make out going calls and manage email how is this not taking into account application? Is the distinction the phone has the ability to do those things (the phone can text and manage emails) vs what the individual wants the phone to do (they want to text and email)
> Oh wait, yeah I think I know what you mean there. Reread what you wrote.


http://personalitycafe.com/sex-relationships/773666-all-relationship-s-infatuation.html#post25488442

I meant stuff like this I linked you. You define what makes a good phone and then you merely seek to find a phone that matches these criteria. Not based on what you want it to do, but more based on an impersonal definition of what a phone is e.g. a phone should be able to make and receive phone calls, to text with it, surf the internet, whatever. Not necessarily because you want or need these applications for your phone in order to use it productively, but because this is what you think a phone should be like, logically. It's how it's defined.



To_august said:


> Facepalm.
> People discuss weak Te vs strong Te, and think that the former is Te indeed, while the latter is Ti.
> It seems like MBTI crappy notions infested even this subforum :/


What do you mean, exactly?


----------



## Ksara (Feb 13, 2014)

Entropic said:


> Yes, I think your process is typical for most people, however:
> 
> http://personalitycafe.com/sex-relationships/773666-all-relationship-s-infatuation.html#post25488442
> 
> I meant stuff like this I linked you. You define what makes a good phone and then you merely seek to find a phone that matches these criteria. Not based on what you want it to do, but more based on an impersonal definition of what a phone is e.g. a phone should be able to make and receive phone calls, to text with it, surf the internet, whatever. Not necessarily because you want or need these applications for your phone in order to use it productively, but because this is what you think a phone should be like, logically. It's how it's defined.


To me this seems backwards haha.
Why have extra features you aren't going to use?

Hmm, so in short Te is concerned with functionality of an object, where as Ti is more concerned with defining the object itself?


----------



## To_august (Oct 13, 2013)

Entropic said:


> What do you mean, exactly?


I mean the phone example. The idea that Te just wants a phone that works, whereas Ti wants to figure out which criteria is optimal for the person to use. 

I don't want to drag dimensionality discussion in here, but... it's pretty obvious, that "Te wants a phone that works" is normative Te at best: phone is a thing that supposed to make calls, send sms -> this phone can make calls and send sms -> this is the phone that works. Three quarters of all types have at least 2D Te, so that shouldn't be a problem for the majority to decide on such stuff. And even for those remaining four types who have 1D Te, taking into account current level of information about phones and their features pouring all over the place and necessity to use phones on everyday basis, it's not that difficult of an issue to fill dimension of experience with said information. So, this is sort of sad that such normative level of Te is understood as the real strong Te. It explains the existing Te bias though, concerning Te people not being able to think for themselves or not caring to think deeply at all.

To measure objective parameters, to figure out how to work with the object that possesses said parameters and come up with innovative ways based on object's qualities to that end, to find options that will ensure effective performance, to create new methodologies and procedures for the productive output, to ensure quality and optimal performance of objects for both individual purposes and other people. All of it is Te.

Btw, I wasn't disagreeing with your points. Quite the opposite.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Ksara said:


> To me this seems backwards haha.
> Why have extra features you aren't going to use?
> 
> Hmm, so in short Te is concerned with functionality of an object, where as Ti is more concerned with defining the object itself?


Yes, that's a good way of putting it. And Ti isn't necessarily interested in notions of "use" as much as it is interested to have something that "is". To be focused on "use" is related to Te, because then we focus on modes of production but if we focus on what "is", then we are interested in defining what makes a thing that thing. For example, a smartphone is somewhat a blend between a PC and a traditional phone. I have now defined the object (the greater the Ti, the more definitional rules are involved, also) so now I seek to buy something that resembles this definition. There's this guy GRArkada on YouTube someone linked in the socionics forum who is an ISTP. Notice how he lays out his videos and defines what makes an anime a good anime, which is kind of odd since he's making reviews and it's based on a subjective idea of like and dislike (Fi and probably a good example of Fi role, since ESTPs have Fi PoLR and they don't end up making these kinds of interviews. They are more practically oriented, being more interested in what has an impact on people). Despite that, he infers more to his own logical standards of what makes a good anime and how it impacts him (Fe). I recommend watching his videos to get an idea of how Ti doms rationalize things outside of "pure" logical contexts that unfortunately tend to become the main examples of how to understand Ti. Ti is logical but it's hardly limited to logical contexts. 

@To_august ok I understand what you mean now. Your previous post was difficult to understand so I wanted to see if I understood it correctly or if you meant something else. 

I agree that people think weak Te being the same as strong Te is a problem in the MBTI. Te doms are very capable of thinking for themselves obviously.


----------



## VacantPsalm (Dec 22, 2014)

I don't know MBTI well enough to know how much of this is Ti or other functions, but since we're talking about phone buying analysis anyways, I'll explain my stance on that scenario. I am decently convinced I am an INTP. (Note: I cut as much info as I thought I could to lower the wall of text. Hopefully everything still makes sense.)


My main concern: I do not like actually working with phones. There is stuff I want to do, and to do it I need to use a phone. Search for info on the internet, check email, make phone calls, these are abstract concepts in my head that are independent of their objective actions/existence as 1s and 0s. Despite the fact I can not even fathom how I would do some of this without interacting with technology, the concept of these needs just being satisfied without any action or objects still exists my head. I want to get as close to that as possible.

When people point to specs as the determining factor as to what phone is superior, I can't help but feel like they're just not paying attention. I know they could have good reasons, and I respect their opinions, but I also wonder if they have actually tried out different phones or if they just assume the numbers matter and go with that. In my opinion, it's all about software. The app opening in 0.4 seconds instead of 0.55 isn't going to be noticeable during day to day use. The app having a loading screen with the app's dumb mascot will distract me. Be smooth and subconscious, that's what matters.


So, how do I decide what phone to buy? Depends. Sometimes I want something simple I know will satisfy me. Sometimes I'm curious and want all the crazy features that are out there. Because, who knows? Maybe some of it will streamline how I use my phone. Perceiving being greater than judging in me is obviously playing a factor here.


Back on topic: I assume this is Ti because it involved so much raw, subjective, understanding. Not understanding of physical phones, understanding of the abstract use of phones. Also, the objective facts (specs) went through the same analysis as random observations and theories in my head. "Better" means nothing to me if I don't notice and agree it's better.

"_Hm, why do these things frustrate me and these don't? Think, compare, think, analyze. Ding! I realized the difference between the mental concept of checking the internet, the physical actions of checking the internet, and my desire for the former without the latter. Objective facts? Hm, let me play around to see if they matter. Think, compare, think, analyze. Ding! NOPE, worthless._"


----------



## Lady D (Mar 17, 2013)

karmachameleon said:


> How about this: Ti tries to find logical inconsistencies internally. Te tries to find logical inconsistencies externally.
> Ti is more inclined to trust theories just because "they makes sense" and Te is more like "but where is the evidence?"


"This doesn't make any sense!" comes a lot from my mouth. Though I find it unappealing that even many T's don't back their arguments with evidence, doing "just because" remarks, even at PerCe. It looks so naive.

Edit: I must edit since verbal phrasing is very subjective on second thought. There were also loads of Ti undermining during this conversation, like what are you saying, all the Ti based scientist are pulling their theories out of their rectums? Seriously? Then some Te users have a three pages long OT talk of anime and no one interferes. And Te's are supposed to be objective.

Well, let me tell you. I have a Te based friend. When we play chess he likes to word his mental processes out loud and did this during the first few games. I'm not mentally aware of next five moves, I just play and end up there. I win, he loses. This guy is also Mensa level with 154 IQ points. I've won since the fourth game. 

When I was a child, just four years old I flew to my grandmother's funeral with my dad. My dad looked outside the window and said: "Grandmother is on the clouds there". I told my father to thow a rope to her so she could climb to the airplane. Then my father told me it's not possible and I felt for the first time how logic can't solve everything. The memory makes me so sad every time.

Another example: I once told on another forum how a cat on the window sill of six-stories building could easily fall off the sill and end up on the ground, injured or even dead. An INTJ corrected me, telling that the cat could land alive as cat's can stretch their bodies and fly like kites (no lie) so the cat could end up unharmed. I told him then than that wouldn't end there - the causality could also cause the cat to end up under some car or being mutilated by some sicko. Events could just begin from the landing...that is also the difference between Ti and Te, IMO (this is yet very subjective, feel free to discuss it/deny it!) 

But anyhow, Ti IMO is very subjective but on objective basis. When something is off, it's unvaluable. Things need constant re-evaluation. But Ti seeks for everything, not for the surface. The cat lands safely on the surface (Te) but could be killed by anything else (Ti).

Please tell me if I'm totally out of clue here! I'm out of comfortable zone with Ti/Te.


----------

