Analysis & Ti

[AndyC]

My understanding of the Ti process is that it understands the constituents of a concept in the pursuit of achieving a greater understanding of the given concept. Forgive me if I'm wrong, because this is coming purely from experience.
I have yet to meet another Ti dominant, so I have no choice but to receive your views on this.
This being rapid and somewhat intuitive analysis. I used to manually take apart a concept to get what I needed, but just over the past year, I feel I have become so skilled at the task that it works automatically. I get very frustrated with people because I am yet to find someone who is even conscious of these processes and probably lack the initiative to practice them anyway. I'm attempting to stay humble in this post, so please spare me any claims of narcissistic confirmation bias, but I, in all honesty, feel I am many many levels above my peers in the feat of abstract analysis (mostly philosophical). Even upon attending a lecture by some philosophy professor in America, though I thought I was to learn a lot from intelligent and educated people such as these, again found they lacked the ability to analyze something to great detail and brilliance. At this point, I thought, "okay, maybe there's something wrong with how I am challenging other people's arguments". I am yet to find out, but I would like to address the intuitive process of Philosophical Analysis, for it seems I have developed the skill to such a point that it happens so rapidly that I simply need my intuition. I get highly frustrated by people in argument and 'deep' discussion because I cannot contribute my ideas without completely confusing the audience.
What are your ideas? Is this evident of some great ability (which I may or may not pursue following your suggestions)? Or is it something else?


Too lazy to edit

 

[Hadoblado]

If this is you being humble I'd hate to see hubris :^)

You haven't really given us any idea about your smarts. All you've said is that you're a logic super saiyan who can't recognise any peer. Given the rates of peerless intellect (rare) and meta-cognitive deficiency (common), I'm inclined to dismiss your claims from the get-go unless you can give an example of your brilliant and detailed analysis.

It sounds like you disagree with people, can't articulate why, and then assume it's because you're a whole bunch of levels above them.

What did this professor say, and why was their analysis so glaringly average?

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

Well, I certainly doubt that you've yet to meet another Ti dominant, even INTP. You've probably just yet to identify them as such. I've known plenty of INTPs myself, and even met quite a few Ni dominants.

I can somewhat relate to what you're saying about feeling that you approach subject manner in a philosophical manner which seemingly no one else approaches in their own dealings. Probably you are very intelligent, but probably you also are failing to see the brilliance of other people you know.

For myself it is not so much in the analysis, but in the creation and in the focus on what I see as the most central ideas regarding how reality works; free will, right and wrong, truth, reality - these things I see as given, and in a fractal sense which pervades other layers of existence. Others seem less interested, or perhaps my particular approach is too idiosyncratic to quite meet discussion from others to a degree of which I am satisfied.

Still though, as far as I feel above others there are plenty ways in which, even in similar areas, others excel above myself. There always remains the possibility to converse with others in a deep and abstract manner, and often it is the social insufficiences of myself rather than lack of intelligence of others which prevents it.

 

[Happy]

I get highly frustrated by people in argument and 'deep' discussion because I cannot contribute my ideas without completely confusing the audience.

Sounds like the fault lies not in a comprehension deficit in your audience but rather a lack of communicative ability on your behalf.

Case in point: I read your post twice and am still unsure what you're trying to ask. My intellectual inferiority as a non-TI dom is clearly part to blame, but if you wouldn't mind, can you please tone down the delusions of grandeur and reframe your query in a way that we peons can understand?

 

[Columbo]

i get what you are saying andy.

i haven't been able to elucidate The Answer to This Question yet.

its my personal mystery of the universe number 1.

if i can solve This Question (as you explain it) i feel my puzzle will be mostly complete.

this is the final piece i'd most like to solve.

grasping...

 

[Turnevies]

In which sense is a chess grandmaster better than common people? By being able to go mentally trough all possible individual steps for the next ten rounds in the blink of an eye? No, they see bigger and bigger patterns of many figures at once. Intuition is unconciously using your internal library of patterns, which grows with amount of experience.

But some people seem to be better at seeing patterns than others. Also, some patterns can be used in only one context, others everywhere.

Anyway, I am personally reasonably able to spot the big patterns in stuff. As a consequence, when I study something I typically want to grasp the big picture as full as possible first before seeing which results would make sense and hence must be true.

But as a matter of fact, many subjects (and life as a whole, for that matter) are too complex to see the whole picture at once no matter how intelligent you are. I crashed on such situations recently, and the solution than is chunking the big question addressed in smaller portions that you can digest. If you haven't encountered such subjects, you should study tougher ones. If you want to do research in, say, string theory, you cannot afford to read every paper puplished before and try to see the correspondence between all of them. When you start working from limited knowledge, intuition is less reliable and more rigid methods must be used.

I saw in your profile you are fascinated by math. Now math typically has this whole rigid definition-theorem-proof structure which I wouldn't really call intuitive. And that necessary because intuition cannot be transferred from person to person, nor can it be falsified. For example, it would seem intuitive to me that a linear operator is always continuous, but it turns out this is not the case for infinite-dimensional spaces.

Oh, and about communicating: think before you start and structure your intuition to more reliable logic internally in the most pedagogical way possible before starting the communication.

 

[AndyC]

Well, I certainly doubt that you've yet to meet another Ti dominant, even INTP. You've probably just yet to identify them as such. I've known plenty of INTPs myself, and even met quite a few Ni dominants.

I can somewhat relate to what you're saying about feeling that you approach subject manner in a philosophical manner which seemingly no one else approaches in their own dealings. Probably you are very intelligent, but probably you also are failing to see the brilliance of other people you know.

For myself it is not so much in the analysis, but in the creation and in the focus on what I see as the most central ideas regarding how reality works; free will, right and wrong, truth, reality - these things I see as given, and in a fractal sense which pervades other layers of existence. Others seem less interested, or perhaps my particular approach is too idiosyncratic to quite meet discussion from others to a degree of which I am satisfied.

Still though, as far as I feel above others there are plenty ways in which, even in similar areas, others excel above myself. There always remains the possibility to converse with others in a deep and abstract manner, and often it is the social insufficiences of myself rather than lack of intelligence of others which prevents it.

Thanks for answering, you understand my situation quite well. It is only this area of what you call creation and focus on central ideas regarding how reality works etc. in which I feel gifted in. I completely agree with you when you say others are brilliant in other areas, as is always the case, the reason I posted this was to see if this was common amongst INTP's and the use of Ti which is still obviously going to be quite diverse. Your points on the ability to participate in discussion are definitely possible, but I think that may not be the case because my own experience has shown I am either rather ignorant of the brilliance of other's arguments (kind of like when Donald Trump receives criticism) or I do in fact have a gift for this abstract understanding of 'how reality works'. I am still thinking about it though, but it does bother me in class discussions.

Originally I started to find myself in this situation in ^^ class discussions, primarily CD (Christian Development *sigh*), and not as often in English. I never really speak up in class, but whenever it's some kind of abstract discussion, it's as if everyone's brains turn off. I talk to a few of my friends about it, make a few jokes about it, but they don't know what I'm talking about, or at least not to the degree to which I experience it. That's been going on for a while now, but it had been getting worse as I felt I kept advancing in my ability to think this way, whilst others seemed stagnant in their growth. I won't go into further detail unless you want me to, but I don't think it's necessary.
With the philosopher, it was a public lecture I attended on free-will and neuroscience, pretty much he was disproving the science suggesting that our decisions are made unconsciously before we reach them consciously. At the end, it was question time, and that's when it got less scientific and objective, but more philosophical. That's where I ran into what felt like another class discussion, but obviously a lot smarter and after that, I wrote this post to get some opinions and ideas from other INTPs.
I am wondering if there is such a way in which I should or maybe I should not pursue such a 'gift'.

Replying to others briefly:
I am sorry for sounding like I did. Some of your responses detailed a fictional belief on my behalf trusting that I am an intellectual super saiyan or poor communication which is obviously somewhat likely. These answers are noted and appreciated thankyou. One mentioned intuition, and offered particular subjects being too complex for intuitive understanding. I believe that the topic I speak of is much broader, less objective, and far more conceptual, which changes the types of patterns you speak of. Thankyou for your answer. Last of all, wtf Columbo.

If you would like to add or challenge something feel free to do so.

 

[AndyC]

One more point, if I were to show what people have said here: http://intpforum.com/showthread.php?p=561346#post561346 to anyone I know, I believe my brother is the only person I know that would be capable of completely understanding most of it. This is, therefore likely Ti, in which I am yet to find in another.