Most people engaging in controversial subjects such as politics or religion will lean either toward Thinking or Feeling and in one attitude, to the exlusion of the other. Feelers will passionately voice their opinions, but often logic will lack. Thinkers will acknowledge many of the logical points I make, but not be as passionate in enlightening others. Extraverted Thinkers will bear control and organize everything (including even people's thought processes, according to Berens!) according to their cold agendas, such as much of political conservatism, or old-line Christian fundamentalism. Introverted Feelers as you may find in liberalism or moderate and liberal Christianity, will be too much on the opposite extreme; being all "nice", but with no hard logic to counter against the logic tossed their way. Most other introverted Thinkers (who could bring in some much needed underlying principles of things; especially stuff like Bible interpretation or social development) seem to just cynically walk away and ignore all this stuff (especially religion). Extraverted Feelers also seem to ignore most of this stuff, not wanting the conflict. (We see here a division between the two tandems: Te/Fi as more involved, and Ti/Fe as less so). Hence, I see fundamentalists beating up on psychology or contemporary Christian music; deterministic Calvinists beating up on Arminian "free will" doctrine, or politial conservatives beating up on liberalism, even for decades blaming welfare for all our financial woes, while giving the rich more, or tossing around Bell Curve theories, crime statistics and other "empirical" data to justify inequity, and in all such disputes, the aggressive side touting their "hard truths", and then the other side countering only with "feeling"-based responses (which actually feed the other sides' arguments, as this is precisely what they dismiss, with statements as blunt as "This is just the cold reality; stop whining!"). Hence, I offer my mix of introverted and extraverted Thinking and Feeling as (hopefully) a more rounded method of offering solutions.

And the blogging of thoughts begins:


From an Extraverted Perceiver's standpoint, freedom means the unfettered ability to respond to immediate experience - the absence of structure and expectation. For Judging types, however, it's the absence of rational structure that traps us, forcing us to respond to things as they happen, to forfeit plans and goals, to depend on the bounty of fate.

I like the way socionics describes j/p

J's are guided by rationality (logic-T or ethics-F) and feel that it is most important. P's are guided by pure unfiltered irrational information (N or S) without strong rational direction and therefore take all things into consideration making them indecisive and often unstructured.

Tjs are guided by logic. The make sure everything is done correctly towards a goal and aim for success which can be measured objectively.
Fjs are guided by ethics. They also want everything to be done correctly and towards a goal, but their definition of success is more subjective and often is focused on the unity of all people.
Nps are guided by intuition. They are drawn towards thoughts, but have a lack of direction so they often just flow with their ideas only wanting understand things/people without any strong reason for it.
Sps are guided by the senses. They are drawn towards everything around themselves and sensual pleasures. They are like the Nps in that they just "flow" with it, but they often have no concern for the consequences as they don't have the far sight of N or the strong guide of rationality.




My theory about Thinking in general, whether it's introverted or extraverted, is that it tries to be primarily oriented to that which is outside the self-perception, the external system, or the objective factor, as much as possible.
I'm trying to further my understanding of the differences between Ti and Te. I know that they are both logical functions that make decisions oriented on the impersonal/objective factor, but there are diffances between the two. I think Ti is more focused on understanding/explaining the objective factor as completely/precisely as possible, and Te is more focused on applying the objective factor to situations as impersonally as possible.


Introverted Thinking-Defines the world based on internally inquiry. Nothing is taken for granted and everything is to be questioned. The system is crafted from within.

Extroverted Thinking-Takes the world for granted and applies proffered ideas to solve external problems.

You could think of Te as a practical problem solver and Ti as a theoretical problem solver. Thus the Te is the practical advice giver and Ti a complex problem solver.

Hense, Te is more "Will it work?" and Ti is more "Is it correct?" Te determines correctness as well, but more in a sense of efficiency, while Ti is more about what's underlying.

The introverted thinking type creates interior worlds of ideas.
The extraverted thinking type has a plan to carry out.

Te seems to focus much more quickly on solutions, whereas Ti more fascinated by "how it works" rather than "making it do what I want."

Ti is systematic, creating over-arching theoretical constructs and describing complex systems. At it's worst it can descend into uncritical and dogmatic acceptance of unfalsifiable theories.

Te is analytical and critical, it relies more on raw logic then Ti and is more critical of broad theories and systems. At it's worst it can descend into cynicism and nihilism.

In terms of mathematical equations to expalin the difference between Ti and Te

Te: 1+1=2 anyone who says its not 2 is an idiot
Ti: 1+1 can be 2. but it can be alot of other things as well. and somehow. use the answer to mutate into a lot more different answers.


Te - exercising your knowledge

Ti - gaining an understanding

One you usually do more than the other. Well developed Ti actually makes for the best analyst. Te is occasionally like troubleshooting.

Everybody has a source.