[Ji] Three TiNe talking *about* their feelings?

Home Page Forums Ask a Demographic [Ji] Three TiNe talking *about* their feelings?

  • Auburn
    Keymaster
    • Type: TiNe
    • Development: l--l
    • F Attitude: Adaptive

    An older exchange from Discord which I wanna post here in light of the Unseelie Fi thread, to see if it makes any difference in evolving an understanding of Ti vs Fi differences?

    Spoiler:

    Auburn | TiNe11/05/2019

    So, for me personally, it can look like this: I feel something, but it is first when I find a thought or impression that pings / aesthethically aligns with the feeling that I accept it as part of myself ^

    which makes it possible to feel things, yet not accept them as part of the self, in some cases right? like “my feelings may be wrong”? i was talking to @bella recently about how she says that it’s frustarting how for Ti-leads one doesn’t automatically translate to the other. So a thought/concept can be accepted despite misalignment with the body, and/or a feeling may be rejected in its truth value if it doesn’t jive with the concept.

    By contrast it seems to her, and I, that with Fi this splitting isn’t as prominent. Even in little ways, I find myself expressing this duality. For example sometimes I say “I think I feel [x]”, hehe.

     

    Nadia /05/2019

    Yes to everything!

    It can get really unhealthy to reject that many feelings as not being me lol

    When we optimally should hold the same standards to thoughts

    (Im trying to practice that with meditation)

    They are equally as much me as as much not me, whatever ’me’ is

     

    Auburn | TiNe11/05/2019

    likewise..! and it’s been an active effort for me in the past year or two to.. bridge this gap between thought and body, to where i have a self-concept in attunement with my organic form’s embodied truths/tastes/evidence.

     

    Nadia /05/2019

    ^ fundamentally important

     

    Auburn | TiNe11/05/2019

    (kinda like artificially doing what I feel Fi does naturally)

    yes.

     

    Nadia /05/2019

    It is like we have to research ourselves to find the ’true’ feelings, over and over

    And yet there is a risk that we will only validate the feelings our thoughts deem true

    So, I might find a nice feeling. Then my thoughts go: oh this feeling is good and usable, hey accept it as you, good job dear. Oh but here comes a negative one, I should listen to it, but I dont want it, I dont want it to be me, but I should… ^ not embodying the feelings 100%

    But when I happen to feel like my feelings are me/aligned with me, it is a powerful things. security

     

    bella11/05/2019

    for me its a lot of ‘why’. like: “oh i have this feeling. but why? where is it coming from? what is its root? is it a true reflection of reality? is it a correct calculation of the circumstances?”

     

    Nadia /05/2019

    Yes yes!

    Is this feeling a valid or usable algorithm

     

    Auburn | TiNe11/05/2019

    lol

     

    bella11/05/2019

    i don’t so much ask if its usable, i ask if its true

     

    Nadia /05/2019

    The ’usable’ variable comes from Fe I think (in my case)

    I have integrated a lot of Fe values in how my Ti judge my feelings, I think

     

     

    Auburn | TiNe11/05/2019

    https://tenor.com/view/airport-securitycheckpoint-security-luggage-gif-5132134

     

    Nadia /05/2019

    Im trying to be pragmatic

     

    Auburn | TiNe11/05/2019

    ^ Ti checking feelings in at the door

     

    Nadia /05/2019

    I’m tired of it…

    Shut up Ti

     

    Auburn | TiNe11/05/2019

    JUST LET THEM ALL IN

    ALL

     

    bella11/05/2019

    “sir, you got no visa”

     

    Nadia /05/2019

    Go to sleep

    Yeh Ti is like customs controller to what I accept as true/me and I like to trick him sometimes to loose up a little (with actual drugs like alcohol or practical techniques like meditation)

    That’s why I find relief in Ne

    Maybe I do in Si too, the rare times I sense it working

     

    Bera11/05/2019

    So…you don’t…make the feelings make sense?:))

    Ok, this is very different

     

    Auburn | TiNe11/05/2019

    we’re working on it ;D

     

    Nadia /05/2019

    We try Bera

     

    Bera11/05/2019

    I mean I simply consider feelings as having priority and then build the beliefs/ thoughts around them…they have to make sense but I can make it so

     

    Auburn | TiNe11/05/2019

    in this sense i often feel Fi’s are way ahead. because they’ve been indiscriminately accepting the good/bad/ugly for way longer

     

    Bera11/05/2019

    I don’t think this is better though

    I wouldn’t even check if the feelings are true…I would assume they are true

    And go from there to thinking ground

     

    Nadia /05/2019

    I think the best is to go forward and back a couple of times, but maybe Ti have to learn the Fi way and vice versa

     

    bella11/05/2019

    there is a distrust in feelings.. that they may mislead from the truth and end up destroying us

    casting us into fallacyland

    where gushy feelings are everywhere

    but truth is scarce

     

    Nadia /05/2019

    So right now Im entertaining the thought ”feelings are also the same level of reality and intelligence as my thoughts” to convince myself to not be so harsh and judgemental about them

    But sometimes it is not enough to really build a pathway of integration

    To Ti about em

     

    bella11/05/2019

    the way i’ve come to legitimize them, is by understanding that they don’t come from ‘nowhere’, but rather they are informing me about things, through subconscious calculations i am making

     

    Bera11/05/2019

    Well I don’t necessarily assume feelings are constructive…leading to positive changes..and could hold them back if they seem to be destructive…but I don’t think of them in terms of true/untrue, real/not real

    But I can be reserved about them too

     

    Auburn | TiNe11/05/2019

    this is really fascinating (kinda wanna post this exchange in the thread, as an example– if u guys don’t mind?)

     

    For the Ji-leads on the forum, how do you relate to this?

    • This topic was modified 2 months, 3 weeks ago by Auburn.
    • This topic was modified 2 months, 3 weeks ago by Auburn.
    • This topic was modified 2 months, 3 weeks ago by Auburn.
    • This topic was modified 2 months, 3 weeks ago by Auburn.
    Cosmo
    Participant
    • Type: TiNe
    • Development: ll--
    • F Attitude: Directive

    I relate to most, if not all of what was said here. I see feelings as possible warnings but I don’t necessarily act on them because it’s hard to know if they are true and I tend to distrust them. I don’t always know whether or not to trust them as real, and I end up filtering them through a detached thought process, usually involving over thinking and over analysis. If they are disruptive enough and I end up trusting/believing them to be unconscious warnings, I usually handle them as a problem to be fixed and dealt with as soon as possible. I can address my emotions from a detached almost objective position; I don’t embody them. I guess this is what it means to Ti my way through them? Most of the time it’s hard for me tell the difference between anxiety and intuition. As I said in the other post, I’m more comfortable with my emotions than I used to be, and I’m trying to be more actively present with them and being in my body, rather than in my head all the time. But I still tend to think through my emotions.

    Side note, I was reading through the Directive Fe description and so much of it hits home, especially being blunt and putting people in their place/shaming them, calling people out for being rude, etc.

    • This reply was modified 2 months, 3 weeks ago by Cosmo.
    • This reply was modified 2 months, 3 weeks ago by Cosmo.
    a.k.a.Janie
    Participant
    • Type: FiSe
    • Development: ll--
    • F Attitude: Unseelie

    I can totally understand the concerns about emotions being illogical and questionable!
    So I gather, some Ti users, when experiencing emotions, doubt or question whether they are either true, valid, or useable (where useable might be from Fe). Whereas, for me it’s always been more like, ‘Ok what is this, exactly? And why? How did it start?…Ok, better remember this data!’–think through them that way–but I never questioned whether the emotion was true or worthy of exploring in the first place. Because it was just…my reality in the moment. And if I am alive, I am always in *some* kind of feeling. And in a way my whole life could be reduced down to that. Yet, other people reduce their life down to Ti (like Descartes). That makes me interested in the potential physiological differences in people with the different functions.

    If nothing else, emotions tell you something about yourself. Sometimes they’re surprising like turning red or crying about something, that you didn’t even know you cared about that much until then.
    One useful check-in I learned recently, is when experiencing uncomfortable emotions, to take a second and ask myself, “What is going on in my body right now? Is this actually sensible for the current situation?” When the answer is no, it’s a clue that it’s actually old repressed stuff from my past getting triggered. When the answer is yes, then it becomes more of a feeling than a passing emotion….but for Ti users it doesn’t usually?

    I’m first to admit, it’s *so* difficult when emotions and logic don’t agree! It’s one of the major struggles of my life, actually.
    The concern about  “gushy emotions everywhere and the truth is scarce” was difficult for me to wrap my head around….But I guess I could understand worrying about that if I had never been one to let emotions come and go like waves, knowing that that’s just what they do. But you’re right, I still might not be able to know the truth on some things. We all won’t. Which is frustrating, but I guess it’s just life, or the human condition.

    Auburn
    Keymaster
    • Type: TiNe
    • Development: l--l
    • F Attitude: Adaptive

    Mmm, so I think it’s fair to say (as we’d expect) that nobody can escape the dilemma that emotions bring to the table. We all get them, we all feel them bubble up, and we all have to contend with whether we feel they’re on-base or off-base, right? For example, an Fi-lead may still feel that their own emotive response is unmatched to the situation in severity/appropriateness/etc.

    But it seems, beyond having to contend with their match-or-mismatch-to-scenarios, Ti can incline people to wonder (and either accept or not) if the emotion is even valid. Fi seems to take it as a given that the information of the body is valid data, even if it brings into one’s awareness a sense that they should try doing self-work on feeling otherwise (i.e. maybe overcoming anger, sorrow, jealousy, etc).

    Does this sound about right to you guys?

    So if Ti determines the data of the heart is invalid, it may ignore it (repression) or try to “change the heart” through Fe’s malleability of the soul in a kind of beyond-human attempt to transcend it, rather than deal with it …from within?

    But then @bella also mentioned trying to understand “why” and where it’s coming from, and I do that too. So the precise difference still eludes me here. Maybe the attempt to understand “why” and where it’s coming from, in Ti users, is still done from a sort of third-person view, more clinically than meditatively, if that makes sense?

    • This reply was modified 2 months, 3 weeks ago by Auburn.
    • This reply was modified 2 months, 3 weeks ago by Auburn.
    • This reply was modified 2 months, 3 weeks ago by Auburn.
    • This reply was modified 2 months, 3 weeks ago by Auburn.
    • This reply was modified 2 months, 3 weeks ago by Auburn.
    • This reply was modified 2 months, 3 weeks ago by Auburn.
    Elisa Day
    Participant
    • Type: FiSe
    • Development: ll--
    • F Attitude: Seelie

    “But it seems, beyond having to contend with their match-or-mismatch-to-scenarios, Ti can incline people to wonder (and either accept or not) if the emotion is even valid. Fi seems to take it as a given that the information of the body is valid data, even if it brings into one’s awareness a sense that they should try doing self-work on feeling otherwise (i.e. maybe overcoming anger, sorrow, jealousy, etc).”

    Yes, this is what I’ve noticed as well. Jelle and I were talking about this in Discord the other day: about how I don’t think much about constructing moral ethical system when I can just follow what I feel is right or wrong. She mentioned how she has to question whether or not her feelings are valid, and I said I wouldn’t doubt my own feelings. I suppose I would if I was encouraged to sit down and really think about it, but my first instinct is to follow them as if they are “fact.”

    Cosmo
    Participant
    • Type: TiNe
    • Development: ll--
    • F Attitude: Directive

    @Auburn

    But then @bella also mentioned trying to understand “why” and where it’s coming from, and I do that too. So the precise difference still eludes me here. Maybe the attempt to understand “why” and where it’s coming from, in Ti users, is still done from a sort of third-person view, more clinically than meditatively, of that makes sense?

    Yes, this is an excellent way to put it. Ti users still try to understand why and where it’s coming from, but more from a third person clinical view. At least for me. Sometimes it’s just a matter of releasing them, through art, exercise, meditation, or crying by myself, all of which can be rather cathartic.

    a.k.a.Janie
    Participant
    • Type: FiSe
    • Development: ll--
    • F Attitude: Unseelie

    I love the level of resolution we’re achieving about Ti and Fi! It really makes me light up (like a seelie fairy lol)
    Especially @Auburn your insight into the internal experiences blew me away.
    100

     

    LadyNerdsky
    Participant
    • Type: FiNe
    • Development: ll-l
    • F Attitude: Unseelie

    “my feelings may be wrong … So a thought/concept can be accepted despite misalignment with the body, and/or a feeling may be rejected in its truth value if it doesn’t jive with the concept.”

    I think I’ve made my description of absorption versus rejection, where pure body alignment is needed
    for acceptance, too broad. There have been plenty of times in my life I’ve rejected what my feelings are telling me for the more logical choice. I just ignored my values for logic/pragmatism this evening: my value/belief is that stealing is wrong. My self-concept is that I’m a moral person. Today I purchased an item that wasn’t what I expected when I got it home, so I got a refund a few hours later. Just now I realised I didn’t put all the parts back in the box and I still have some merchandise at home. The right thing to do is return the missing part to the store. Keeping it would be stealing and go against my values, and conflict with my self-concept as a moral person. However, the evil corporate chain isn’t going to miss my $19 of revenue plus it’s not worth my personal time or petrol money returning it on principle. So I’m keeping it and I don’t care. A cost-benefit analysis on morality.

    Things that defy logic and are more subjective (in my opinion), plus they perhaps don’t matter in the big-picture, like taste in music, films, aesthetics, style and so on I do apply the degree of absorption versus rejection metric to assess alignment with my “truth”. But bigger picture issues and concepts go through the logic filter before feeling, and thought and feeling can absolutely be out of alignment.

    As an example, I listened to a podcast interviewing a psychotherapist who studied and treated paedophiles. My personal feeling on that predilection is disgust. It’s not a morally or ethically “right” behaviour. But my thought is that it’s logical for a professional to devote time and resources supporting “pre-offending” individuals who know their interest in children but haven’t acted, or support offenders to prevent re-offending. The psychotherapist’s comment was that many in her profession refuse to deal with paedophiles because of this disgust reaction. While that’s their prerogative, I think that’s short-sighted and selfish. Why can’t an individual put aside their discomfort for the greater good? Why does their individual disgust have more importance than the emotional fallout and trauma that future victims will experience? If I was a psychotherapist I’d work on keeping my disgust to myself and focus on finding a logical and pragmatic way to prevent children from becoming victims. That makes more sense to me.

    “bridge this gap between thought and body, to where i have a self-concept in attunement with my organic form’s embodied truths/tastes/evidence.”

    This is part of why I got my Enneagram type wrong. I was carrying around a certain self-concept that made sense in that framework, to me. It was only in presenting myself to others and I got their feedback that I was confronted with evidence showing my mental self-concept did not match embodied truth. It took external forces and clarification on definitions in the system for me to shift the lens of my kaleidoscope of inner truth to a different, more accurate view. And the mismatch was terrible. Imagine me trying to argue I have the same presence and personality as Kanye West or Kim Kardashian. It’s painfully obvious in retrospect, but at the time I had a very poor understanding of myself despite years of studying psychology and personality.

    @cosmo “Most of the time it’s hard for me tell the difference between anxiety and intuition.”
    This x 100.
    _________

    I’m trying to think about why I’m still relating a lot to the Ti descriptions above about emotions and feelings rather than the Fi experience, despite being Fi/Te axis.

    Reflecting on the somewhat dark paedophile example above, I never questioned that my personal disgust reaction is wrong until now. Even though in that same podcast research was presented that paedophilia is not a choice but works similar to a born sexual orientation, therefore paedophiles have no control over their preference (although they DO have control over the decision to act on that preference). Therefore my feelings of disgust over paedophilia is analogous to someone feeling disgust over homosexuality (I don’t, just an example), which is an outdated societal belief, so my disgust reaction is actually “wrong” and needs to change.

    However, I think Te makes a large contribution to Fi/Ti confusion. I swear my Te is conscious (@Auburn my working theory is that I’ve been FiNe I—I since my teens and Ne gained consciousness in my late 20s. I just haven’t given you a good sample to work with yet). Te’s pragmatic, external-focused, system-based thinking diminishes emotions and feelings to focus on what works and what makes sense. Individual feelings don’t trump big-picture benefits.

    Maybe conscious Fi-Te in tandem gives the third-person, distant, clinical view that Ti also experiences. But conscious Fi-Te doesn’t automatically question the truth or validity of the heart or feelings (although possible with conscious effort). Instead, effort goes to minimising this subjective feeling to effectively focus on what works in objective external systems, creating a detached, logical temperament. Ti in contrast does automatically question the truth or validity of the heart or feelings (but can integrate the emotional /feeling register with conscious effort). Instead, effort goes back into subjective thinking (altering internal logical frameworks, changing the heart, or blocking feelings), which also creates the detached, dispassionate, logical temperament.

    I don’t know. I’ve been looking at this for too long, so I’m just posting it as is. Not sure if people with both Fi and Te conscious agree with this.

    Auburn
    Keymaster
    • Type: TiNe
    • Development: l--l
    • F Attitude: Adaptive

    Keeping it would be stealing and go against my values, and conflict with my self-concept as a moral person. However, the evil corporate chain isn’t going to miss my $19 of revenue plus it’s not worth my personal time or petrol money returning it on principle. So I’m keeping it and I don’t care. A cost-benefit analysis on morality.

    ^ I was about to say that this is Te pragmatism before I read on when u said…

    Te’s pragmatic, external-focused, system-based thinking diminishes emotions and feelings to focus on what works and what makes sense. Individual feelings don’t trump big-picture benefits.

    And I was like, yep!

    Je acts as the antithesis to Ji in this sense, because Ji would like to operate by pure principle always, but sometimes it’s impractical. When we decide on practical choices, counter to our 100% Ji alignment, we’re choosing a different cognitive priority (Je). But yes I think this is wholly beside the point of Fi vs Ti.

    The choice to allow pedophiles to go to therapy, to solve a wider world problem, rather than refuse to engage them out of disgust/revulsion, is a Je choice not really a Ti choice. And I would venture to say that at no point did the disgust reaction vanish, you just chose to put it aside for a more locomotive ‘solution’. In other words, I see this as the Fi/Te axis with Te being executed, not really Ti.

    I honestly wouldn’t be surprised if you had Te conscious (it would really make sense with everything else), and the videos so far haven’t found an occasion to show it yet– likely due to the well known issues with talking to a camera. If present, I think your Je would surely come out in an interview format– especially if you chose to talk about a topic you have strong opinions about.

     

    • This reply was modified 2 months, 3 weeks ago by Auburn.
    • This reply was modified 2 months, 3 weeks ago by Auburn.
    • This reply was modified 2 months, 3 weeks ago by Auburn.
    a.k.a.Janie
    Participant
    • Type: FiSe
    • Development: ll--
    • F Attitude: Unseelie

    @ladynerdsky I noticed something as well.

    @cosmo “Most of the time it’s hard for me tell the difference between anxiety and intuition.”
    This x 100.

    I also struggle with the exact same problem from time to time. (And last time the subject came up for me was in a group where members referred to their MBTI types, in a thread about the orientation and strength of one’s intuitive function, not Ti vs Fi). So how it is for me, sometimes I have anxiety and I’m catastrophising and wondering if something bad might happen, and wonder if maybe its an intuition that I should actually listen to. And actually, I’ve noticed a pattern that I now apply to help me distinguish: When it is a correct intuition, there’s always the memorable “lightning bolt” moment where the thought of a specific thing suddenly hits me “from the outside”, like out of nowhere. And only then do I start my thought processes about it. But I pretty much already know, anyway. On the other hand, if I was just already in a state of worrying, and then through that mindset I arrive at “oh no, what if x happens?”. Then I know that I’m actually worrying too much.

    I see my approach as being sort of independent of Ji type, or any type really. Now that you’ve mentioned it, however, in light of the fact that Fi leads are known for being the most proficient at dealing with our own emotions, anxiety is tricky, as it is a secondary emotion. So it eludes my usual abilities to deal with on my own. I don’t know if you relate to this, but you did get me thinking. (Not to hijack the thread or anything.)

    Tea
    Participant
    • Type: NeFi
    • Development: l--l
    • F Attitude: Seelie

    “Keeping it would be stealing and go against my values, and conflict with my self-concept as a moral person. However, the evil corporate chain isn’t going to miss my $19 of revenue plus it’s not worth my personal time or petrol money returning it on principle. So I’m keeping it and I don’t care. A cost-benefit analysis on morality.”

    What stands out to me here is that pragmatism still does not stand on its own. The corporation itself is treated in a good/bad fashion in the justification process. Yes, other details have been considered in the cost-benefit analysis, but the ethical consideration of the other vs. the self remained. The Ji element.

    I face issues like this as well, and I find I’m never able to let pragmatism win fully. I would feel discomfort every time I saw the item. Even though the matter has mentally and ethically been settled, the item itself may still tug on me. I have to get rid of objects sometimes because of their association to something. It’s like a purging.

     

    “Most of the time it’s hard for me tell the difference between anxiety and intuition.”

    There was a time when I could not distinguish anxiety from guilt. It turned out – I learned in retrospect – to be a dairy allergy. But the feeling was just like guilt, and I thought I had some moral impurity of the heart or had lied or something to feel that way. It was similar, though still distinct, from the “Is this my intuition warning me, or is this just anxiety?” feeling.

    • This reply was modified 1 month, 1 week ago by Tea.
    fayest42
    Participant
    • Type: FiNe
    • Development: ll--
    • F Attitude: Unseelie

    Honestly, I doubt this is a difference between Ti and Fi, but I could be wrong. My immediate response to any feeling is to start analyzing it. “Why do I feel this way?” “Where is this coming from?” “Is this a reasonable response?” I don’t automatically consider it part of “me.” It’s just something some part of my brain has offered up for consideration. But I don’t agree with or identify with all the random thoughts and feelings my brain offers up. After all, sometimes different parts of my brain offer up contradictory feelings. And sometimes those feelings are based on totally fallacious ideas.

    I find it interesting that Nadia mentioned working on this in meditation because from what I’ve learned of meditation, part of the practice of meditation is recognizing that your thoughts are not “you.” I don’t think it’s particularly healthy to always identify with your feelings. On the other hand, I know my default mode of analyzing everything I think and feel is also not healthy. What I’m working on in meditation is just allowing myself to feel whatever I feel in the moment and observe it without either identifying with it or analyzing it.

    a.k.a.Janie
    Participant
    • Type: FiSe
    • Development: ll--
    • F Attitude: Unseelie

    I would be quite surprised if this wasn’t a difference between Ti and Fi. For me, it has always seemed like accepting my feelings as valid, at least to me (and I can’t know what it’s like to be anyone else, anyway), and then mentally storing them as they pertain to my lived experiences, has been the cornerstone of my core values, morals, and beliefs, which stem from the Fi. But I can see that other people can also be Fi lead, and feel differently, such as @fayest42 if I read that correctly.

    I’m also interested in how this pertains to meditation. I recently heard of an explanation why Fi leads are the most into meditation. It was based on the premise that of all the functions, Fi is the most tightly ego-identified. And so Fi leads, more so than any other types, face the greatest difficulty (and need?) to disidentify with the ego, which is a main goal of meditation.
    I’ve been trying to get back into meditation (but failing due to not having my own room or little introvert space) and so when I do try now, I notice it’s harder to get into a flow state. Rather than the usual mindfulness, one meditation that has worked well for me (morbid as it sounds) is called “dying before you die”. Also inner body awareness, but I find it difficult.

    I agree with the concept posted earlier about Fi users taking a liberty that Ti users do not take. I lost where I read it, but something like, if you have a hunch that feels right to you, but cannot know if it’s factually correct, Fi accepts it as true (at least provisionally), whereas Ti must reject it. If anyone can explain this better, please do. But I think it is an important difference between the two.

    It does seem to me like Ti users (and other types) would have an easier time with meditation with regard to disidentifying with the ego, since their primary focus is already somewhat detached and “objective” or “out there”. So if you feel something, it could be easier to recognize it as “not you” since you already doubt it. So your “self” (higher self) is already more liberated from your egoic self? Whereas I come from a starting point along the lines of “Even though I don’t know for a fact if this feeling is true, I am experiencing it, so it’s in any case true for me, and this is me, and this is my core” which seems extremely difficult to unbind.

    Pertaining to “changing the heart” I noticed something the other day. I realized I was doing something similar to the Ti approach described at the beginning of this thread. I felt something, but thought it was due to being unhealthy, so I “shouldn’t” feel that way, and tried to mentally talk myself into feeling differently, based on the other person’s likely perspective / the more objective view of the situation. Then, as I became aware of what I was doing, I thought I could subtly feel my body releasing stress hormones, in response to the attempt to repress feelings. Then I wondered, do Ti users not experience this? I know I suffered from adrenal exhaustion for a long time, and still do a little bit, and now I can see one reason why it might be more common in feeling types.

    sekundaer
    Participant
    • Type: TiNe
    • Development: l-l-
    • F Attitude: Adaptive

    Thank you @- Jannie for guiding me to this thread, highly relevant for what we were discussing.
    At first I would never consider Ti or any function more free of  the egoic self than the others.  And when I say this it is only based on my idea of  what must be the truth – a Ti axiom. Its probably so that many  Ti users are not identified with their emotions, but being stuck in ideas is just as egoic as I see it.  It might even be that they first have to get in touch with emotions to even be in a state where it is meaningful to even talk about disidentifying  with them.
    Interesting you say that Fi leads are most into meditation.  I think you are right (also yoga, self help of any sort, healthy food). Much like type 4’s are drawn to these things and are the most frequent type at self development courses.  There is a podcast on the net where a meditation instructor (Sam Harris) is doing a guided meditation with the Te lead Richard Dawkins.  Its very funny to hear Dawkins response afterwards.  He didnt have any experience of any sort,  it felt totally meaningless to him.  A Fi would probably experience something,  or even a lot, comfortable or uncomfortable.  So it could be more like a journey,  changes are experienced during the time sitting,  something different happens if relaxing the attention instead of trying to control/suppress thoughts/emotions and this gives rise to insight and so it becomes meaningful.

    I tend to refrain from talking about myself in this regard as this destroys the whole picture.   I would be like the Fi group in this respect.   And to your question, Janni, “I thought I could subtly feel my body releasing stress hormones, in response to the attempt to repress feelings. Then I wondered, do Ti users not experience this?”,   Yes, certainly!
    But again, that is me, probably many Tis will not experience it.  I do not use feelings as arguments, but I typically look to see if there shouldnt be an argument for the way I feel. And if there isnt I wait to see if  something has been overlooked (it can be years after I find that I can put a checkmark that the feeling didnt come from nowhere).   So the difference might be that I dont accept a hunch to be true without some evidence.  Actually I can be rather judgemental when people use emotional reasoning or trust an intuitive flash when all science contradicts it.  There was a hot tempered Te who said to me the other day that he was only interested in facts, not in opinions.  And something in me said, Yes, sir!

    But to come back an idea I mentioned earlier,  might not be novel at all, but I havent seen it explicitly  expressed.  As I said elsewhere: As a Ti I dont see myself as not-Fi. (And as a Si user  I dont find myself not-Ni).  I do however find my self as not-Te !  As I find myself as not-Se!
    It is described somewhere in an introduction that Fi and Ti has much more in common with each other than with any other function (same with Je, Pe, Pi).  Next, we know that Ti can integrate the polarity (Fe) to some degree,  but it cant really get access to Te at all.
    So one could look for where one has experienced the most failure.  Its a little similar to the old jungian strategy, except for Jung problems in areas that are T would suggest F and so forth)  Here it would be different, if Te  is totally foreign to a person it could point towards Ti.
    Jungians always tended to regard me as N because they saw me fail at S.  More precise it was probably a failure at Se AND Te (coming too late because I couldnt find my way etc.).   Probably nothing new in this, but it was also meant to make the point that maybe Ti and Fi are able to integrate each others characteristics to a degree where it just becomes more or less Ji ?  Its contrary to CT theory, but I *feel* it to be that way for me (or is it  just an interplay by Fe and Si ….  but isnt that like saying: This is not water, its just brint and helium)

     

     

Viewing 14 posts - 1 through 14 (of 14 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
© Copyright 2012-2020 | CognitiveType.com
This website's articles, its reading methodology and practices are the intellectual property of J.E. Sandoval.
Animaged GIFs, images and videos belong to their respective owners.