Your channel is pretty cool. I discovered it through this comment of yours, btw! I have already watched several of your videos and looking forward to watching more!
Wonderful as always Ren. I do agree that Ti tends to deal with the organization of “logical” information, or essentially truth data. Whereas ni as you said has to do with patternization. One piece I would add is that ti in the case of si users (going back to function pairings) organizes differently than ti-ni. With ti-si the natural tendency is towards organizing in a sequential process, such as in syllogisms or step by step mathematical processes. Where as Ni-Ti tends to be more free floating. The benefit of the ni-ti is that they ARE logically consistent because the unconscious patternization of information is producing certain conclusions based on a wide number of unconscious data, they just can’t seem to understand why it is the case, and may speak in a way that does injustice to their truth claims. The value in the si-ti process is that, if one accepts the premises that they present, you must also accept the conclusion. They tend to be far better at grounding their claims in something acceptable. For examples of si-ti look like analytic philosophy like from Spinoza or Wittgenstein (I think they are both infj, they’re just using an si process in their writing). For ni-ti look at more continental philosophy such as Heidegger (I believe he is an istj but if you flip the dominant pairing of si-fi over its axis you get ni-ti, so it’s basically the same cognitive process with enough effort).
I think I'm an ENTP and I don't think my Ti has a super step by step vibe to it. Maybe because my Si is inferior. For me my Ti is there to clean up whatever I get intuitions about. At the same time I think I have a lower tolerance for ambiguity than ti-ni does. I'm often after super precise information and answers and I get frustrated if people seem wishy washy or are overly general in a shallow way.
@@bunnyteeth365 it could very likely be due to fourth slot si, although in entps I have most often noticed this manifests as a blindness to defining personal emotional states. For entps ti-si is also a passive combination so they don’t go out trying to define their logical frameworks as actively as others. Are their reasons why you don’t find enfp relatable? You seem to identify as a thinker, but enfp would be ne-te for cognitive pairing theory.
@@AlburyShaffer I used to think I was an INFP or ENFP. The main reason I can't relate with ENFP is because I just can't get into the Te mindset. I did originally see myself more like a feeler, but as I got exposed to more INFPs and ENFPs Fi made less and less sense for me. I think for me Ti can be sort of passive and in the background, but it does show up when I need to cope with chaos.
@@bunnyteeth365 it’s hard ti give any advice on the internet as far as type goes. If you haven’t seen Harry’s videos at CPT I highly recommend. I’d ask in what ways you value ti and fe? Otherwise I have a video on Quadra values (type philosophies) which may be illuminating. It shows very clear differences between the kinds of mindsets ti-fe users have versus te-fi
Thank you, Ren, for honoring my request! I really loved hearing your thoughts on the two. Distinctions between functions is actually something I think about often (Maybe my Ne always wanting to explore, and Si wanting more stable reference points?). I also think about how they might mesh or how they might clash, or possibly offer new perspective. So this was great food to think about! Lately I have been conceptualizing Ni as related to the timeless universal elements, the living patterns that keep showing up, but (hopefully) evolving as we continue to unfold on our paths of increased consciousness. Ti feels more modular and structured to me, trying to arrange things neatly: Categorizing and subcategorizing precisely and finely, arranging elements for a desired outcome(builds), getting ideas to line up logically…. And instead of having a timeless feel, it has a more situational feel, depending on what is currently being encountered or analyzed, accounting for the many variables or components involved.
I think what made me confused about Ni and Ti is that Ti often doesn't seem very conscious for me. I tend to look for consistent patterns and systems that are true. Once my systems are set up, I barely think about them any more and just use them. They seem fluid and intuitive once they're built, but the process of building them often isn't the most intuitive. I know that when I create a Ti system I often chase after certainty and often want precise answers to things. If I have a Ti system, I often just know the answer to things and just know what to do without even thinking. That can superficially seem like Ni. I think having Ne also confused things as well. Ne also gives me hunches and notices patterns, but it just isn't as stable as Ni. I use Ti to make sense of those intuitions and clean them up.
I think that Ti and Ni can be quite complementary functions indeed. However, I also wonder if they can sort of “butt heads” at times. I can recall a time in my life in which my well established patterns for viewing the world (Ni) came into conflict with my reasoned thoughts about particular pieces of data (Ti). This produced an enormous sense of cognitive dissonance in my mind, and it really took me quite a while to work through it. Does anyone have any thoughts about this idea? I’d be curious to hear what other people think.
I think Jung, who wrote Psychological Types (Core psychological elements that keep showing up throughout the timeline) also was very resistant to the idea of categorizing people (Ti). (Or that could have been a fake Facebook meme about categorizing… I’m not sure.) In Ren’s book he opts for the Infinite attitude over a Finite… Maybe that is a form of butting heads?
Brilliant:). If a Ti dom and an Ni dom were asked the same question not related to any topic of particular interest would it be possible to tell the difference from their answers do you think?
![I Read 693 Psychology Books: Here Are The Few That Fixed Me - Inner Work Library [161/500]](/img/n.gif)
I am amazed to see how on the same topic, INFJ and INTJ we explain things completely differently. Good job !
Your channel is pretty cool. I discovered it through this comment of yours, btw! I have already watched several of your videos and looking forward to watching more!
I'd be interested in hearing your explanation of Ni and Fi. As well as how Te articulates them.
Wonderful as always Ren. I do agree that Ti tends to deal with the organization of “logical” information, or essentially truth data. Whereas ni as you said has to do with patternization. One piece I would add is that ti in the case of si users (going back to function pairings) organizes differently than ti-ni. With ti-si the natural tendency is towards organizing in a sequential process, such as in syllogisms or step by step mathematical processes. Where as Ni-Ti tends to be more free floating. The benefit of the ni-ti is that they ARE logically consistent because the unconscious patternization of information is producing certain conclusions based on a wide number of unconscious data, they just can’t seem to understand why it is the case, and may speak in a way that does injustice to their truth claims. The value in the si-ti process is that, if one accepts the premises that they present, you must also accept the conclusion. They tend to be far better at grounding their claims in something acceptable.
For examples of si-ti look like analytic philosophy like from Spinoza or Wittgenstein (I think they are both infj, they’re just using an si process in their writing). For ni-ti look at more continental philosophy such as Heidegger (I believe he is an istj but if you flip the dominant pairing of si-fi over its axis you get ni-ti, so it’s basically the same cognitive process with enough effort).
I think I'm an ENTP and I don't think my Ti has a super step by step vibe to it. Maybe because my Si is inferior. For me my Ti is there to clean up whatever I get intuitions about. At the same time I think I have a lower tolerance for ambiguity than ti-ni does. I'm often after super precise information and answers and I get frustrated if people seem wishy washy or are overly general in a shallow way.
@@bunnyteeth365 it could very likely be due to fourth slot si, although in entps I have most often noticed this manifests as a blindness to defining personal emotional states. For entps ti-si is also a passive combination so they don’t go out trying to define their logical frameworks as actively as others. Are their reasons why you don’t find enfp relatable? You seem to identify as a thinker, but enfp would be ne-te for cognitive pairing theory.
@@AlburyShaffer I used to think I was an INFP or ENFP. The main reason I can't relate with ENFP is because I just can't get into the Te mindset. I did originally see myself more like a feeler, but as I got exposed to more INFPs and ENFPs Fi made less and less sense for me. I think for me Ti can be sort of passive and in the background, but it does show up when I need to cope with chaos.
@@bunnyteeth365 it’s hard ti give any advice on the internet as far as type goes. If you haven’t seen Harry’s videos at CPT I highly recommend. I’d ask in what ways you value ti and fe? Otherwise I have a video on Quadra values (type philosophies) which may be illuminating. It shows very clear differences between the kinds of mindsets ti-fe users have versus te-fi
Thank you, Ren, for honoring my request! I really loved hearing your thoughts on the two. Distinctions between functions is actually something I think about often (Maybe my Ne always wanting to explore, and Si wanting more stable reference points?). I also think about how they might mesh or how they might clash, or possibly offer new perspective. So this was great food to think about!
Lately I have been conceptualizing Ni as related to the timeless universal elements, the living patterns that keep showing up, but (hopefully) evolving as we continue to unfold on our paths of increased consciousness. Ti feels more modular and structured to me, trying to arrange things neatly: Categorizing and subcategorizing precisely and finely, arranging elements for a desired outcome(builds), getting ideas to line up logically…. And instead of having a timeless feel, it has a more situational feel, depending on what is currently being encountered or analyzed, accounting for the many variables or components involved.
I think what made me confused about Ni and Ti is that Ti often doesn't seem very conscious for me. I tend to look for consistent patterns and systems that are true. Once my systems are set up, I barely think about them any more and just use them. They seem fluid and intuitive once they're built, but the process of building them often isn't the most intuitive. I know that when I create a Ti system I often chase after certainty and often want precise answers to things.
If I have a Ti system, I often just know the answer to things and just know what to do without even thinking. That can superficially seem like Ni. I think having Ne also confused things as well. Ne also gives me hunches and notices patterns, but it just isn't as stable as Ni. I use Ti to make sense of those intuitions and clean them up.
I think that Ti and Ni can be quite complementary functions indeed. However, I also wonder if they can sort of “butt heads” at times. I can recall a time in my life in which my well established patterns for viewing the world (Ni) came into conflict with my reasoned thoughts about particular pieces of data (Ti). This produced an enormous sense of cognitive dissonance in my mind, and it really took me quite a while to work through it. Does anyone have any thoughts about this idea? I’d be curious to hear what other people think.
I think Jung, who wrote Psychological Types (Core psychological elements that keep showing up throughout the timeline) also was very resistant to the idea of categorizing people (Ti). (Or that could have been a fake Facebook meme about categorizing… I’m not sure.) In Ren’s book he opts for the Infinite attitude over a Finite… Maybe that is a form of butting heads?
Brilliant:). If a Ti dom and an Ni dom were asked the same question not related to any topic of particular interest would it be possible to tell the difference from their answers do you think?