I was JUST looking for a refresher on the difference. I feel like Ti gets misrepresented extremely often, but I myself don't have a great way to easily explain it either even as my lead function. In a lot of ways, I can just sort of... TELL when something would work, or is internally consistent, or is accomplishing whatever goal/objective the thing is either explicitly stating or implying. I don't think Ti always comes with solutions, like maybe the Te people assume. It's quite frustrating as Ti-Ne to have such a finely tuned "flaw detector" as I call it, but not always know what to replace the flaw with. I can have a suggestion, an idea, or a plan, but I can't be certain it'll actually SOLVE the issue until I try and/or run the simulation. (Which usually takes a LONG time or a lot of mental energy, which I don't always have) I know it frustrates people and, like sucks, but I do my absolute BEST work when treated as a computer program. Bring things to me, I'll analyze them and approve-reject them based on standards we're trying to achieve, and if you need to replace something I rejected, come up with an option and I'll re-check. I might be wrong or just adversarial, but I see Te as focused on getting results, but not being ESPECIALLY picky with what the phrase "results" means. They seem to accept a huge range of outcomes as "what we wanted' when, to me, you can only design for 1 thing at a time. Anyway, there's your abstract Ti discussion, lol. I can speak in variables and parameters literally all day (I do in my head already) but once you start asking for proof.... ehhhh idk. I almost never remember WHY or HOW I know or believe anything. I've discovered over my career that the vast majority of people can't speak purely hypothetical for long, and always trips me up and freaks me out when confronted with that reality. I always like to say/think "The simulation proves the rule" and I've noticed Se-Ni folks REALLY hate that one lol. No wonder us INTPs love games. Purely hypothetical systems. Hell yes.
I don't mean harm on them but maybe in these times try thinking of them as a project you've got to extrapolate information from & in a certain amount of time, this project will blow up so you've got to be quick. But being conscientious that you don't overwhelm them or set the bomb off prematurely lol. Does Si hone in on things? If so, hone in.. & "attack".. In a good way lol.. You have 5 minutes to live, GO!! lol
Theres also a lot more to the subjective and identity of Ti that is not only logical but the logic within our decisions and personal theories that make us, us. Like Ti does not like to be criticized with disrespect to the effort we put into forming our frameworks. If you tell us we are wrong we expect you to prove you are right and it usually makes us upset if its carelessly questioned. Also, we can see them as lenses/perspectives and will sometimes keep multiple opposing lenses/models going because we understand we might be wrong and question all the time, even if its something we currently live/act in accordance to
I think I can see Te as an organizer and perhaps Ti as an identifier (maybe). For instance, I noticed that descriptions of both Ti dominant types described them as being like encyclopedias with lots of knowledge about certain things. And for Te types, they're more directive, in an organizing kind of way -- like you do this thing, that person will do that thing, and everything will function as one. Personally, when I've gotten into discussions with my Ti dominant brother (and I'm Te second), I felt that he wanted to go into a depth of understanding of the topic that I don't have and that I only don't want because it would take my focus away from being able to view and understand more things and how they all are related to each other. I want that Te overview of everything, even if it means I (personally) won't get to have a really deep understanding of any of them -- and I imagine that for Ti, they face the exact opposite preference and choice, favoring depth of understanding versus an overview but shallow understanding of things.
i think both te and ti are striving for what "make sense" for them. for ti, what make sense for them is their framework of how they understand things, the core of how things works together towards their definition. For example, a computer is supposed to work a certain way in principle, then they piece together each parts to see how they all sum up to work that way. when even a small part is inconsistent, they can tell, because it doesn't fit the principle. while for te, instead of the principle, their focus is more outcome oriented, what make sense to them goal wise. for example, a te goal would be to get rich, and they will piece together different resources to get to that goal. if the resource can help them get rich, it then makes sense for them. similar logical process, but different reward systems
Of course this is the first thought people have about them... But you're also theoretical, aren't you? I would say both Fi and Ti are more about being definitional. Fe and Te are creatively building up theories for practical purposes--what generally works with people or things. Fi and Ti want to dissect those things right to the core, carefully, taking as much time as needed. Logic is something more related to rationality/judgment functions, imo.
I don't think xxTPs would be very happy about what you just said & I can see why because it could almost be dangerous, given the nature of Fi >sometimes
@@cass8330 I can see Fi being fluid, although I don't know the direct mechanism for it or why. It seems to somehow being the effect of having Fi conscious. You'll see many Fi are too open minded almost to the point of having no boundaries. However, their final verdict has to be their own opinion--after they doubt themselves over and over. But Ti, being tied to Fe, more or less has the direct mechanism to adapt to consensus. At its core, it tries to dismantle and seek reality according to majority of people. They try to get their thinking "gaslighted" by people in a way, no matter what inventive idea they come forward with. While Te's thinking is creative and keep on building things up, no matter what the consensus says. Fi decides what or whom to care about. One could say Fi is self-biased, while Fe is people-biased in the sense of whose perception and judgments do you trust more? Trying to think of the consequences to who is more scientific or who's smarter (if I understand your concern of "being dangerous" correctly) is too complicated, I'll let you decide how to see it.
I haven't watched the video yet, but i will after reading the comments. This is coming from a dominant Ti user (INTP) First thing first, all subjective functions may look and sound similar to each other, simply because the subjective nature of these functions. Ti is a Thinking function, while Ni is a intuitive function. They work differently. Ti = conceptual, logical, detail oriented (this detail oriented is sometimes mistaken for sensing preference, so INTP mistyped as ISTJ , ISFJ or ISTP is quite common actually). But the "detail oriented" is not like sensing detail oriented preference. It's more about exploring all the details of an information. A Ti (dominant) user must know something down to the tiny bits to be able to give a good logical judgment. Much like Fi users have to explore every side of their feelings to make good value judgments. Ni = non conceptual, assumptive, big picture oriented Ni users, just like Ti users, might come across as having difficulty to explain their minds because they "just know", but the "just know" are not the same. Ni users *really* don't know, because Ni processes information unconsciously, while Ti knows but unable to explain it's thoughts, so what a Ti (dominant) presents to the whole world is usually the conclusion of the thoughts going through their head. It can be worsened if paired with Ne, because their thoughts are intuitive, and because intuition is abstract, not concrete, they can't just explain things using intuitive perspective because the world requires concrete evidence, this might make them come across as Ni doms. Ni users aren't aware of the information processing in their heads, but Ti users know. I know how I got from A to Z, i have the concept in my head, i have the framework, but to explain what's going on in my head during the information processing is impossible, too complicated, it involves webs of mental activities, devising scenarios, information gathering, etc etc. Ni (dominant) users don't see that in their heads. They just gather information, study it, and then one day, boom, suddenly they understand what they were studying days/weeks/months prior. Ni is a data gathering function, Ti is a judging function.
I write knitting patterns and there can be a lot if math involved but no matter how well planned out my theoretical numbers are, I always prefer to actually knit the thing and count and measure physical stitches and theres always something to finesse and fudge that doesn't fit perfectly with the math. I think if the SFJs that follow my patterns saw my process, they would shudder at the lack of logical consistency and messy Te trial and error but it's that Te that figures out the work-around and gets to the final product that you cant argue with because like "here's the sweater." So I always think of myself like with this brave Te willing to fly blind and kinda try and fail and see what happens so that the Ti users who follow my patterns have a procedure and are comfortable starting their projects knowing theres already been some thought behind it. That being said, I cant follow a pattern to save my life 😂 I can start but then it's like "naw, I dont like doing it that way, I'm gonna do it this way!" And wind up with something totally different.
I understood what you said at the end about Si Te being procedural (maybe because I am an ISTJ and have noted this in my everyday life). However can you expand more on how INTJs use Te in comparison? What do you mean by strategic? Does that mean they’re always working towards some goal on an everyday basis and switching up the steps of the plan to revolve around each changing goal? I’m thinking for example an ISTJ and an INTJ are at a grocery store. The ISTJ has a list and goes through each aisle needed to gather the items on the list, in order from closest to entrance and ending with closest to the cash register. What would the INTJ do differently?
As a INTJ (self typed), my Ni strategy is always to get everything on the list as fast and convenient as possible (I don't want to waste too much of my energy on the Se). So I would go to the store that I am most familiar with at a time that I know they are not busy and fully stocked. Then I would just shop in the store in a route that makes the most sense with my shopping list and that takes the least amount of steps.
It's the framework. It's like when washing socks separately and there is "white socks". I don't want to wash them with white clothes or with other (colored) socks. They don't fit in they don't have a place. So of course I hide them and slowly discard them when no one is looking. That's Ti isn't it? It's not right to wash them alone.
I kinda wish you labeled the chapters by the functions you are describing. I get so confused when we get into function pairings. I have a hard time knowing which pairs you are describing as you describe them. Like instead of frameworks you could put Ti-Ne is... Te-Ni is... The Ti - Ni loop is...
I could use te , just angered me of its imperfection…..& those who were so fond of te, gave them one smooth heartbreaking te taste(entp) not everyone deserved humble nerdy ti talk Te~~~ you just dont belong here Ti~~~ dont blame ur self, there is a tactical plan of plan of plan to Solution this
I often find myself stating/complaining/"judging" that I don't like/accept something because "it's the principle" that's off. If we reduce this to a very simplified comparison, it could be said that Te is like/favors a "quick fix" method (...such as going on a crash diet) whereas Ti is more about long-term processes (lifestyle changes)? This is just my simplified analogy but could be incorrect. If it is, do correct me✌
Ti user: wants to make a video on why Mc D have their logo yellow and red ...... goes on Google searchers 100 articles for 1 week then comes up with result..... **Reason**: was question **why** this fact works questions even the obvious. Result: comes up with better understanding learns that due to evolution red and yellow stimulated hunger at microlevels Te user: Okhay thats an obvious fact why should i question it Lets try and see if i get my work done by this they don't neglect why something is working but instead the see if something works and learns in the process of doing things.
You use a lot more Ti than Te. Almost all you do in this video is explaining the general principles you figured out relating to this subject and how you think things work through the lens of your framework. No specifics or data driven approach. Also your description of your Te as 'what if someone doesn't fit this' is just Ne verifying your Ti or Fi. I think it's normal for an INFP to use a lot of Ti and not really be aware of it
In her 8 functions videos she says that your 8th function is the function you give off the impression of using/can make up for due to your dominant function being the same J/P type with the same orientation. So I think that might give the impression of her using Ti as an Fi dominant. For the specifics/a data driven approach, I think maybe a more sensing dominant type would use a specifics approach. Since Si is third for INFP, it's an unconscious function that runs in the background, so it makes sense that she uses Ne to communicate it. Also Te is her inferior so I imagine it's not as well developed/used compared to other Te users. Essentially function ordering can radically affect how used functions are displayed. I think this video more applies to comparing Te vs Ti in the same position since it doesn't take into account stack ordering As for the example you reference I think it can apply to Ne verifying Ti, but that's more the process of "here is an example that doesn't fit, okay let's adjust the model now" whereas Te sees that as more justification to not have a mental model in the first place, rather it's better to only consider how the logic applies in a case by case basis (which as an INTJ I definitely relate to)
im apparently an infp (with the smiles thing), and yeah i think my ti is decent too. when it comes to fe and te stuff, that's when i distrust my own judgements
@@thehalfbloodserb No, she is definitely using a lot of Ti here and on other videos, it's easily observable. Her approach is almost always top down: figuring out principles and how the system works in general first, and then see how they apply to the specifics. As you said Te users just prefer to go right into the specifics. For INTJs it seems to me that you still have an approach to understanding or solving things that is much more data driven and practical, you simply double down on the conclusions rather than on gathering data or understanding details, but it's still a calculating and bottom up approach. I don't usually see the INTJs I know figuring out things by principle, it's more "just tell me how this works so I can take my own conclusions", or something like that. You still can use Ti just fine, but only when it's really necessary lol What she described is definitely Ne tool verifying Ti by doing a "what if" or "what about" though experiment. She is generating information based on her own understanding to verify if it is consistent with the theory at hand to figure out objective truth. This fits the concept of adversarial learning. As an INTP I am very familiar with this since I do this all the time ;)
Truth. 2+2=..........5? For someone (you) who thinks that truth is relative, I don’t know why you bother with logic. “2+2=........what ever you want it to.” 1984. I have unsubscribed from your channel.
I was JUST looking for a refresher on the difference. I feel like Ti gets misrepresented extremely often, but I myself don't have a great way to easily explain it either even as my lead function. In a lot of ways, I can just sort of... TELL when something would work, or is internally consistent, or is accomplishing whatever goal/objective the thing is either explicitly stating or implying.
I don't think Ti always comes with solutions, like maybe the Te people assume. It's quite frustrating as Ti-Ne to have such a finely tuned "flaw detector" as I call it, but not always know what to replace the flaw with. I can have a suggestion, an idea, or a plan, but I can't be certain it'll actually SOLVE the issue until I try and/or run the simulation. (Which usually takes a LONG time or a lot of mental energy, which I don't always have)
I know it frustrates people and, like sucks, but I do my absolute BEST work when treated as a computer program. Bring things to me, I'll analyze them and approve-reject them based on standards we're trying to achieve, and if you need to replace something I rejected, come up with an option and I'll re-check.
I might be wrong or just adversarial, but I see Te as focused on getting results, but not being ESPECIALLY picky with what the phrase "results" means. They seem to accept a huge range of outcomes as "what we wanted' when, to me, you can only design for 1 thing at a time.
Anyway, there's your abstract Ti discussion, lol. I can speak in variables and parameters literally all day (I do in my head already) but once you start asking for proof.... ehhhh idk. I almost never remember WHY or HOW I know or believe anything. I've discovered over my career that the vast majority of people can't speak purely hypothetical for long, and always trips me up and freaks me out when confronted with that reality. I always like to say/think "The simulation proves the rule" and I've noticed Se-Ni folks REALLY hate that one lol.
No wonder us INTPs love games. Purely hypothetical systems. Hell yes.
Do you have an xxFJ friend? Because one of 'those' might be useful at a time like this.
I don't mean harm on them but maybe in these times try thinking of them as a project you've got to extrapolate information from & in a certain amount of time, this project will blow up so you've got to be quick. But being conscientious that you don't overwhelm them or set the bomb off prematurely lol. Does Si hone in on things? If so, hone in.. & "attack".. In a good way lol.. You have 5 minutes to live, GO!! lol
5 minutes before you could die I mean *
I think you can create your own book 😅
Theres also a lot more to the subjective and identity of Ti that is not only logical but the logic within our decisions and personal theories that make us, us. Like Ti does not like to be criticized with disrespect to the effort we put into forming our frameworks. If you tell us we are wrong we expect you to prove you are right and it usually makes us upset if its carelessly questioned. Also, we can see them as lenses/perspectives and will sometimes keep multiple opposing lenses/models going because we understand we might be wrong and question all the time, even if its something we currently live/act in accordance to
I think I can see Te as an organizer and perhaps Ti as an identifier (maybe). For instance, I noticed that descriptions of both Ti dominant types described them as being like encyclopedias with lots of knowledge about certain things. And for Te types, they're more directive, in an organizing kind of way -- like you do this thing, that person will do that thing, and everything will function as one.
Personally, when I've gotten into discussions with my Ti dominant brother (and I'm Te second), I felt that he wanted to go into a depth of understanding of the topic that I don't have and that I only don't want because it would take my focus away from being able to view and understand more things and how they all are related to each other. I want that Te overview of everything, even if it means I (personally) won't get to have a really deep understanding of any of them -- and I imagine that for Ti, they face the exact opposite preference and choice, favoring depth of understanding versus an overview but shallow understanding of things.
WOAH EXACTLY!!!!
I couldn't understand Ti because I don't have that in function stack, thanks for explaining. My Te is also very low. I both envy high T users.
I like how you compared “frameworks” and “blueprints” - Ti+Ne vs Ti+Se. great video!
How does mental diseases like depersonalisation manifest in the 16 types. especially feelers.
i think both te and ti are striving for what "make sense" for them. for ti, what make sense for them is their framework of how they understand things, the core of how things works together towards their definition. For example, a computer is supposed to work a certain way in principle, then they piece together each parts to see how they all sum up to work that way. when even a small part is inconsistent, they can tell, because it doesn't fit the principle.
while for te, instead of the principle, their focus is more outcome oriented, what make sense to them goal wise. for example, a te goal would be to get rich, and they will piece together different resources to get to that goal. if the resource can help them get rich, it then makes sense for them.
similar logical process, but different reward systems
Of course this is the first thought people have about them... But you're also theoretical, aren't you?
I would say both Fi and Ti are more about being definitional. Fe and Te are creatively building up theories for practical purposes--what generally works with people or things. Fi and Ti want to dissect those things right to the core, carefully, taking as much time as needed.
Logic is something more related to rationality/judgment functions, imo.
I don't think xxTPs would be very happy about what you just said & I can see why because it could almost be dangerous, given the nature of Fi >sometimes
@@cass8330 I can see Fi being fluid, although I don't know the direct mechanism for it or why. It seems to somehow being the effect of having Fi conscious. You'll see many Fi are too open minded almost to the point of having no boundaries. However, their final verdict has to be their own opinion--after they doubt themselves over and over. But Ti, being tied to Fe, more or less has the direct mechanism to adapt to consensus. At its core, it tries to dismantle and seek reality according to majority of people. They try to get their thinking "gaslighted" by people in a way, no matter what inventive idea they come forward with. While Te's thinking is creative and keep on building things up, no matter what the consensus says. Fi decides what or whom to care about. One could say Fi is self-biased, while Fe is people-biased in the sense of whose perception and judgments do you trust more? Trying to think of the consequences to who is more scientific or who's smarter (if I understand your concern of "being dangerous" correctly) is too complicated, I'll let you decide how to see it.
@@atomnous Thanks but why do you think that Ti users "Try" or even WANT to get their Ti "gas lit"? .. Are you trying to gaslight me?? Lol..
@@atomnous Thank you🙏 [eye twitches, evil psychotic smile *]
@@cass8330 Haha no. It's just the impression I'm getting with Fe Ti axis.
That was a great video. Really enjoyed your explanations.
I can't differentiate between Ni & Ti.
I know the difference theoretically but I can't See It.
I haven't watched the video yet, but i will after reading the comments. This is coming from a dominant Ti user (INTP)
First thing first, all subjective functions may look and sound similar to each other, simply because the subjective nature of these functions.
Ti is a Thinking function, while Ni is a intuitive function. They work differently.
Ti = conceptual, logical, detail oriented (this detail oriented is sometimes mistaken for sensing preference, so INTP mistyped as ISTJ , ISFJ or ISTP is quite common actually). But the "detail oriented" is not like sensing detail oriented preference. It's more about exploring all the details of an information. A Ti (dominant) user must know something down to the tiny bits to be able to give a good logical judgment. Much like Fi users have to explore every side of their feelings to make good value judgments.
Ni = non conceptual, assumptive, big picture oriented
Ni users, just like Ti users, might come across as having difficulty to explain their minds because they "just know", but the "just know" are not the same. Ni users *really* don't know, because Ni processes information unconsciously, while Ti knows but unable to explain it's thoughts, so what a Ti (dominant) presents to the whole world is usually the conclusion of the thoughts going through their head. It can be worsened if paired with Ne, because their thoughts are intuitive, and because intuition is abstract, not concrete, they can't just explain things using intuitive perspective because the world requires concrete evidence, this might make them come across as Ni doms.
Ni users aren't aware of the information processing in their heads, but Ti users know. I know how I got from A to Z, i have the concept in my head, i have the framework, but to explain what's going on in my head during the information processing is impossible, too complicated, it involves webs of mental activities, devising scenarios, information gathering, etc etc.
Ni (dominant) users don't see that in their heads. They just gather information, study it, and then one day, boom, suddenly they understand what they were studying days/weeks/months prior. Ni is a data gathering function, Ti is a judging function.
I write knitting patterns and there can be a lot if math involved but no matter how well planned out my theoretical numbers are, I always prefer to actually knit the thing and count and measure physical stitches and theres always something to finesse and fudge that doesn't fit perfectly with the math.
I think if the SFJs that follow my patterns saw my process, they would shudder at the lack of logical consistency and messy Te trial and error but it's that Te that figures out the work-around and gets to the final product that you cant argue with because like "here's the sweater."
So I always think of myself like with this brave Te willing to fly blind and kinda try and fail and see what happens so that the Ti users who follow my patterns have a procedure and are comfortable starting their projects knowing theres already been some thought behind it.
That being said, I cant follow a pattern to save my life 😂 I can start but then it's like "naw, I dont like doing it that way, I'm gonna do it this way!" And wind up with something totally different.
i really like your insight, thanks casual cognition.
I was hoping to hear more about the Te+Ni explanation, that's the least T combination I've seen so I have no much idea on their style
I understood what you said at the end about Si Te being procedural (maybe because I am an ISTJ and have noted this in my everyday life). However can you expand more on how INTJs use Te in comparison? What do you mean by strategic? Does that mean they’re always working towards some goal on an everyday basis and switching up the steps of the plan to revolve around each changing goal? I’m thinking for example an ISTJ and an INTJ are at a grocery store. The ISTJ has a list and goes through each aisle needed to gather the items on the list, in order from closest to entrance and ending with closest to the cash register. What would the INTJ do differently?
As a INTJ (self typed), my Ni strategy is always to get everything on the list as fast and convenient as possible (I don't want to waste too much of my energy on the Se). So I would go to the store that I am most familiar with at a time that I know they are not busy and fully stocked. Then I would just shop in the store in a route that makes the most sense with my shopping list and that takes the least amount of steps.
I love these function videos!
It's the framework. It's like when washing socks separately and there is "white socks". I don't want to wash them with white clothes or with other (colored) socks. They don't fit in they don't have a place. So of course I hide them and slowly discard them when no one is looking. That's Ti isn't it? It's not right to wash them alone.
I kinda wish you labeled the chapters by the functions you are describing. I get so confused when we get into function pairings. I have a hard time knowing which pairs you are describing as you describe them. Like instead of frameworks you could put Ti-Ne is... Te-Ni is... The Ti - Ni loop is...
I could use te , just angered me of its imperfection…..& those who were so fond of te, gave them one smooth heartbreaking te taste(entp) not everyone deserved humble nerdy ti talk
Te~~~ you just dont belong here
Ti~~~ dont blame ur self, there is a tactical plan of plan of plan to Solution this
I often find myself stating/complaining/"judging" that I don't like/accept something because "it's the principle" that's off. If we reduce this to a very simplified comparison, it could be said that Te is like/favors a "quick fix" method (...such as going on a crash diet) whereas Ti is more about long-term processes (lifestyle changes)? This is just my simplified analogy but could be incorrect. If it is, do correct me✌
incorrect
I think you're conflating Ti vs Te with Ni vs Se
fr
How do you not have more views?
Ti user: wants to make a video on why Mc D have their logo yellow and red ...... goes on Google searchers 100 articles for 1 week then comes up with result..... **Reason**: was question **why** this fact works questions even the obvious.
Result: comes up with better understanding learns that due to evolution red and yellow stimulated hunger at microlevels
Te user: Okhay thats an obvious fact why should i question it
Lets try and see if i get my work done by this they don't neglect why something is working but instead the see if something works and learns in the process of doing things.
Whooo context
You use a lot more Ti than Te. Almost all you do in this video is explaining the general principles you figured out relating to this subject and how you think things work through the lens of your framework. No specifics or data driven approach. Also your description of your Te as 'what if someone doesn't fit this' is just Ne verifying your Ti or Fi.
I think it's normal for an INFP to use a lot of Ti and not really be aware of it
In her 8 functions videos she says that your 8th function is the function you give off the impression of using/can make up for due to your dominant function being the same J/P type with the same orientation. So I think that might give the impression of her using Ti as an Fi dominant. For the specifics/a data driven approach, I think maybe a more sensing dominant type would use a specifics approach. Since Si is third for INFP, it's an unconscious function that runs in the background, so it makes sense that she uses Ne to communicate it. Also Te is her inferior so I imagine it's not as well developed/used compared to other Te users. Essentially function ordering can radically affect how used functions are displayed. I think this video more applies to comparing Te vs Ti in the same position since it doesn't take into account stack ordering
As for the example you reference I think it can apply to Ne verifying Ti, but that's more the process of "here is an example that doesn't fit, okay let's adjust the model now" whereas Te sees that as more justification to not have a mental model in the first place, rather it's better to only consider how the logic applies in a case by case basis (which as an INTJ I definitely relate to)
INFPs have 1D Te but 2D Ti. We are not aware of our Ti but it's stronger than Te.
im apparently an infp (with the smiles thing), and yeah i think my ti is decent too. when it comes to fe and te stuff, that's when i distrust my own judgements
@@thehalfbloodserb No, she is definitely using a lot of Ti here and on other videos, it's easily observable. Her approach is almost always top down: figuring out principles and how the system works in general first, and then see how they apply to the specifics. As you said Te users just prefer to go right into the specifics.
For INTJs it seems to me that you still have an approach to understanding or solving things that is much more data driven and practical, you simply double down on the conclusions rather than on gathering data or understanding details, but it's still a calculating and bottom up approach. I don't usually see the INTJs I know figuring out things by principle, it's more "just tell me how this works so I can take my own conclusions", or something like that. You still can use Ti just fine, but only when it's really necessary lol
What she described is definitely Ne tool verifying Ti by doing a "what if" or "what about" though experiment. She is generating information based on her own understanding to verify if it is consistent with the theory at hand to figure out objective truth. This fits the concept of adversarial learning. As an INTP I am very familiar with this since I do this all the time ;)
@@NoOne-wt6om That makes sense
Interesting video..
Entp.
Wow, cool to be so early
Hey
I thought this was a spanish lesson 😅
Glad to be first
Lol, interesting
Truth. 2+2=..........5?
For someone (you) who thinks that truth is relative, I don’t know why you bother with logic.
“2+2=........what ever you want it to.”
1984.
I have unsubscribed from your channel.