# Strange question Te vs. Ne



## marzipan01 (Jun 6, 2010)

Jung says that Te is productive, when it analyzes it constructs, reunites, advances beyond the analysis in a new combination. Whereas Ne finds connections.
So, then I'm wondering about the difference between finding connections and building new ideas. 

I had always thought that Ne was responsible for taking two facts, linking them and seeing a new idea emerge from that link. But perhaps this is actually Te as, according to Jung's definition, it appears that Te recognizes two pieces of the puzzle as fitting together somehow and putting them together to create one now uniform piece of the picture.


----------



## Waiting (Jul 10, 2011)

I have no studied the cognitive functions, however from your description these are two that i have developed to an extremely high extent. I can not separate them, they seem to always function simultaneously. As new information enters my mind, connections immediately start going off relating it to countless other ideas in my head. This causes the "Te" to go off, as you described, and either construct new ideas, deconstruct old ideas, alter ideas into a different form or, sometimes file it away and change nothing at all if it does not cause any inconsistency. Either way this all happens instantaneously and involuntarily. It seems highly efficient to me, but then my mind has always worked in this way and I have no basis for comparison other than what I can perceive or am told of other people.

Don't know if that helps in any way, hopefully there is a bit of insight.


----------



## bobdaduck (Apr 24, 2010)

I don't really have enough information to answer this question, but maybe I could add some perspectives.

Intuition, in the introverted and extroverted orientations, is a perceiving function. This means that it deals with the gathering of information, not the use of it. Ne and Ni both find connections, but they do not do anything with the information. A judging function does that.

point being Ne is a perceiving function and Te is a judging function so Te is more likely to be building systems to use and Ne is building systems just for the information.
For me, I gather information through Ni, and then it is stored into my unconscious. A judging function (Fe or Ti for me) will then highlight information to be brought to conscious memory.


----------



## Monkey King (Nov 16, 2010)

First and foremost, Te is goal oriented. Te forms a foundation to build on. It's an organizer of information. It will take any information of relevance to its goal and implement it. 

Ni synthesizes information. It connects information but it tries to connect them to form a cohesive conclusion. It takes different ideas and find the link that fits them all into one box. 

For example: 

When someone asks me, "why is the world in the condition it's in?" 

I simply say, "globalization." Why? Because it's the big term that combines the socio-economic disparities, environmental degradation, 3rd world corruption, the oil peak, and it exemplifies the post-modern urban practices we see today. It's gluttonous and pretty soon it will pop. All of those all deal with globalization--- I will most likely look at it as cause and effect. Te will through a logically sequence the information to show relevance to globalization --- It will be described like a domino effect. This happened because of x and as such, y happened, which then initiated z. 

I might also say, globalization is like an obese kid whose had to much cake to eat (excess of resource consumption)(Ni). How do we prevent it from popping? Well we force it to be lean--- Te would ask, what will that entail? What needs to be done? Then it pulls the hard data until it's satisfied. It classifies the information where it should be to get to the goal. It is also constantly checking Ni; making sure to reign it in when it gets too creative. 


In short, Te systematizes and Ni synthesizes. Te orders information and Ni takes it a part to put back together in a new way.


--------------
EDIT: 
In retrospect, it's difficult to describe Te without Ni. Otherwise, all you'd have is a one sentence definition.


----------



## Nitou (Feb 3, 2010)

Monkey King said:


> In retrospect, it's difficult to describe Te without Ni. Otherwise, all you'd have is a one sentence definition.


I also have difficulty explaining functions in isolation from the others. They blend together. To your question above, 

When someone asks me, "why is the world in the condition it's in?" 

I wonder what the person is thinking and why they are asking, unless it is clear from the context. Maybe I will invite them to clarify the question or answer it themselves. I get a sense of a pool of possibly-related ideas, from sociobiology to the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse. In abridged form: the world is in the condition it is in because of nature and sin. I might argue this point, for example, by saying it is more fundamental than globalization. Nevertheless, I am likely to put "globalization" into the idea pool for future analysis. I would also be curious about/debate your ideas of action.


----------

