How does Ti work

[ivan]

I have a question and I am wondering if you guys know the answer. So, INTP/ISTP`s dominant function is Introverted thinking which is Judging function.

1) Can Ti function be by its self or does it have to be linked with a periencing function.
2)Can you judge something without any Perceiving function`s cooperation?

3)Is Ti in INTP and ISTP the exactly same or is different because INTP construct and categorize structured understanding of information perceived in Ne+Si and ISTP do it using Se+Ni?

 

[Auburn]

Right. As with any natural or artificial (i.e. computers) processing system, without data there is nothing to judge between. Judgment cannot happen without content from which to draw distinctions and delineations.

Each of the judgment functions is a different methodology for discriminating between, and organizing information.

Is Ti in INTP and ISTP the exactly same or is different because INTP construct and categorize structured understanding of information perceived in Ne+Si and ISTP do it using Se+Ni?

Different. Since we have no way of observing Ti operate without the use of either Ni/Se or Ne/Si then, practically speaking, it's always tinged by the perception pairing adjacent to it. The psyche operates as a whole, with every component colouring every other.

The Ti of the TiNe and the TiSe may be, in principle, identical, but in practice/observation/behavior they always carry a different quality and focus.

 

[ivan]

Right. As with any natural or artificial (i.e. computers) processing system, without data there is nothing to judge between. Judgment cannot happen without content from which to draw distinctions and delineations.

Each of the judgment functions is a different methodology for discriminating between, and organizing information.

Different. Since we have no way of observing Ti operate without the use of either Ni/Se or Ne/Si then, practically speaking, it's always tinged by the perception pairing adjacent to it. The psyche operates as a whole, with every component colouring every other.

The Ti of the TiNe and the TiSe may be, in principle, identical, but in practice/observation/behavior they always carry a different quality and focus.

Thanks so much. It really clarified my understanding of P and J functions.

 

[Black Rose]

Auburn,

Since I am INFJ, how do you mesh Ti and Ni in them? An Intuitive function looks either outside or inside. Ti would organize Ni but Ni and Ti both look inside so what it the dynamic? It's easier for me to think of how Ni ad Fe go together. Because that has to do with knowing truths about people. But Ti and Ni would have more to do with truths in general that some people would think:

54Coming to His hometown, He taught the people in their synagogue, and they were astonished. “Where did this man get such wisdom and miraculous powers?” they asked. 55“Is this not the carpenter’s son? Isn’t His mother’s name Mary, and aren’t His brothers James, Joseph, Simon, and Judas? 56Aren’t all His sisters with us as well? Where then did this man get all these things?”

 

[Auburn]

Auburn,

Since I am INFJ, how do you mesh Ti and Ni in them? An Intuitive function looks either outside or inside. Ti would organize Ni but Ni and Ti both look inside so what it the dynamic? It's easier for me to think of how Ni ad Fe go together. Because that has to do with knowing truths about people. But Ti and Ni would have more to do with truths in general that some people would think

The way Ni and Ti come together is in the formation and crystallization of truth paradigms which have perfect internal logic, but which are predicated on the intuitions of Ni's far reaching sense.

Ni+Fe plays a guru role, where Ni's vision/worldview helps inform and guide social landscapes into a certain alignment appropriate to a brand of morality most favored.

Ni + Ti plays a theorist role, but what you may call a mystical theorist. To give you an example, the systemic logic behind the 7 chakras is almost undoubtedly a creation of an Ni+Ti pairing in a person. As well as the I-Ching and other such systems.

[bimgx=400]http://imgur.com/EjxEdkV.jpg[/bimgx]
​

The Ni+Ti type may be said to be deeply focused on a type of internal, phenomenological "science". There is a type of sterility in their method; in that they speak in terms of absolutes, axioms and logical conclusions... but these conclusions are largely based on Ti axioms of symmetry and deduction -- rather than observations of the outer world.

Since Ti is used as a subordinate process to Ni's vision, Ti's systemizing ability is put to use in explaining, in a succinct way, the "map" that Ni holds internally. This map is based on causal relationships suspected to exist between and across many/all elements of reality, and when these intuitions are given structure under Ti they're often communicated with words such as 'laws' of nature, reality and "being".


~~

As you'll note, any doubly introverted individual (i.e. a person heavy in both their introverted processes) will be prone to a type of detachment or disassociation from reality, to where many of their thoughts cease to represent the outside world and risk a degree of delusion.

The same applies to the NiTi type which, absent of a balance with Fe and Se, will be magnetically drawn to explain everything from within their rather superstitious NiTi compound, void of a proper feedback from the world.

 

[Black Rose]

In the iceman thread I just made I said I felt weightless for 7 seconds and one with the universe. I do understand chakras to some degree. Energy must flow and any blockages or severe paths is a problem. The symmetry really is about wholeness and balance and control of energy. There are not just 7 chakras but it is an entire integrated system like how your shit is weaved together as one thing. A shirt that is damaged, where threads are like a ball of yarn and all tangled uneven is very detrimental to a person. Everything is interconnected in a very literal sense.

Your brain cells and nerve are trees that weave together in a 3D way. balance is the complete internal feedback loops that give you power and energy, this is where visions come from, this is why daydreaming is possible. Not only is energy building up but like the internet information loops and folds inward. So you can manifest any image or feeling or sound because it is a web inside you. This may not be definite that you are really connected to the universe outside you, but inside you the connection is everything connected to everything else. You can create entire world and movies and anything else that a mind can create to the highest complexity possible.

So definitely you can think that only 7 chakras exist if you channel the energy that way. But also you can think of you entire web system as a medium. Like a solid glass cube 6 feet wide. Transparent glass that can hold any amount of light and energy. Not just 7 chakras. Because you can change what is inside you by paying attention to it, your intentions create your internal reality.

I am still trying to balance myself emotionally and physically. I know that it is possible to create anything inside me that I want to create.

 

[ivan]

Right. As with any natural or artificial (i.e. computers) processing system, without data there is nothing to judge between. Judgment cannot happen without content from which to draw distinctions and delineations.

Each of the judgment functions is a different methodology for discriminating between, and organizing information.

Different. Since we have no way of observing Ti operate without the use of either Ni/Se or Ne/Si then, practically speaking, it's always tinged by the perception pairing adjacent to it. The psyche operates as a whole, with every component colouring every other.

The Ti of the TiNe and the TiSe may be, in principle, identical, but in practice/observation/behavior they always carry a different quality and focus.

So how exactly does Ti work. So, it take perceive information and what does it do to it. I know all P function are just images stored in your mind. What are judging functions then? How do we make judgement to discriminate information? How would you describe it?
Thanks

 

[Auburn]

So how exactly does Ti work. So, it take perceive information and what does it do to it. I know all P function are just images stored in your mind. What are judging functions then? How do we make judgement to discriminate information? How would you describe it?
Thanks

So if you imagine a computer as an analogy...
Bits/bytes come in, and they get sorted out by the processor.

In cognitive typology, the four J functions are four different modalities of sorting out that information. And just like computers, our brains make countless micro-judgments per minute using those functions to organize our sense of the world.

Judgment is a whittling down process. Perception brings to our mind an unfiltered panorama of ....well, perceptions... and judgment is what differentiates the elements in the data.

So for example, every second your retina is hit by something like 90+ frames of perception. Each frame carries loads of information, but none of it is very useful on its own. It needs to aggregate a few thousand times in order for it to become useful to daily human life.

So actually, judgment takes information and first applies a very coarse consolidation process, like so:

[bimgx=500]http://cognitivetype.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/pyramid1.png[/bimgx]
​

At the bottom we see a basic registration of Perception, such as "hot", "cold", "bright", "circular", "square". As we move up toward the top of the pyramid those dots merge into more complex conclusions that account for more variables, including previously reached conclusions.

Judgment identifies the basic elements in the imagery before us. It goes from identifying simple shapes and hues, to conclude a thing like "that's a lamp", "that's my car" or "there are my keys!". It takes discrimination to distinguish what is a lamp, and where a lamp starts and ends.

The same operation is eventually involved in distinguishing abstract concepts from one another, grammar, and even philosophy. Human intelligence is, in many ways, just simple mammalian intelligence with a lot more processing power. Which means we just have more layers of processing to reach more abstract thinking.

In the diagram above there are 5 levels of consolidation. These are just arbitrary; it's a gradient in reality, but what it shows is that smaller conclusions form the backbone of more complex conclusions.

How it works

So at each "level" of processing in this pyramid, the psyche reduces environmental variables down to fewer, by drawing conclusions, then only consciously manages those conclusions.

So if you saw a beautiful scenery with a lot of rich detail, judgment comes in and says "tree" "bird" "ball" "road" street" "little boy" and the nuance is omitted.

This is what allows judgment to take what is essentially an unquantifiable, endless stream of information (P) from the environment, and make sense out of it, for pragmatic or even subjective purposes.

Here is a video that does a great job of explaining these differences between judgment and perception:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFs9WO2B8uI

Sorry ivan! I didn't have time to answer the Ti question! But I figured this post is long enough as it is.

 

[cheese]

Lol'd hard at the end of Auburn's post. What a bait-and-switch.

Make sure you come back and finish it!

Save​

 

[Auburn]

It's no fun without a little... anticipation
Can't give it up all at once, hon..

Make sure you come back and finish it!

Going back to the computer analogy, and getting into the methodologies of these 4 judgments... There are 2 subtypes of judgment.

• Ji discriminates how well aligned things are within themselves (I)
• Je discriminates how well aligned things are to the external world (E)

For Ji, judgment is not extending outward.
It's confined to being self-referential. So if you imagine datasets coming in from perception, Ji examines each dataset against its own principles, rather than to how they compare in a larger context to each other.

How Ji Chooses

You can say Ji is axiomatic in its discrimination and Je is pragmatic in its discrimination. Ji looks for absolutes and Je looks for situational functionality.

Because of how Fi and Ti compare data solely to themselves or their principles, they have a judgment that is about being 'self-consistent'.

• Ti is a type of judgment that takes a dataset (P) and runs it through examination with itself. It discriminates with a bias toward symmetry and absence of contradiction.
• Fi is a type of judgment that takes a dataset (P) and runs it through examination against the emotional register. It discriminates alignment or misalignment with 'human nature' more or less.

In English, what this means is Ti is innately prone to love (and make) systems of logic, philosophy, linguistics, taxonomy, mathematics and so on. But engineering is a bit harder for Ti, since it requires deeper consideration of interdependent variables. We make better theorists than engineers.

This whole post is an example of Ti at work. So if it feels gratifying to have data neatly sorted out this way, it's because of Judgment and more specifically Ti.

Nevermind the fact that the psyche is infinitely more complex! And that we're certainly leaving out a lot in the realm of biology, neurology, etc. All of which could uproot this understanding. Those are the types of data considerations that really drain Ti, who just wants to understand things simply, elegantly and symmetrically.

(Once again, the whittling out of information.)

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

The same applies to the NiTi type which, absent of a balance with Fe and Se, will be magnetically drawn to explain everything from within their rather superstitious NiTi compound, void of a proper feedback from the world.

Is NiTi actually a type or is it NiFe that has gone into some form of stress and replaced the Fe with Ti? What I mean, is that for the NiTi, is it advisable to engage more in Fe and if so how could this be done?

 

[Auburn]

Is NiTi actually a type or is it NiFe that has gone into some form of stress and replaced the Fe with Ti?

Pragmatically speaking, there are some individuals who could be called NiTi, in the sense that they give mental priority to Ti over Fe, even if the resting state of their psychology would be Ni-Fe-Ti-Se. There's always a deeper reason for this type of distortion, as NiTi isn't a naturally occurring hierarchy.

NiTi is a shorthand for the NiFe-Ti subtype, but their general attitude will indeed be I+N+T not I+N+F. So they'll often type as INTx in preference-based systems.

What I mean, is that for the NiTi, is it advisable to engage more in Fe and if so how could this be done?

The short answer is; by doing what you know you really don't want to do.

Working on the development of a subconscious function is taxing and a little akin to going to the gym. It's uncomfortable because it's underused and therefore ineffective.

What such a person needs to decide is whether or not they want to change who they are as a person. Because shifting from an NiFe-Ti to an NiFe-Fe, for instance, involves a shift in beliefs/values/ideas just as much as a strengthening in certain neural pathways.

It's an alchemical journey, which involves getting over one's resistance to others; to experiences, closeness, vulnerability, spontaneity, uncertainty, failure, etc. It involves letting go of paradigms and ideas, questioning and revising assumptions (Pe), engaging in a reciprocal exchange with the dynamic world (Je) and so on.

Needless to say, this will likely sound somewhat revolting to a very intense NiTi, because it represents all the things they have resistance against (FeSe); identity-wise and about the world.

But something in them already knows - and has known - that they are hiding in the pseudo-dispassionate place they are, not because it's who they are and that's that, but out of a deeply felt incompetence and an avoidance of their calling for improvement.

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

Pragmatically speaking, there are some individuals who could be called NiTi, in the sense that they give mental priority to Ti over Fe, even if the resting state of their psychology would be Ni-Fe-Ti-Se. There's always a deeper reason for this type of distortion, as NiTi isn't a naturally occurring hierarchy.

NiTi is a shorthand for the NiFe-Ti subtype, but their general attitude will indeed be I+N+T not I+N+F. So they'll often type as INTx in preference-based systems.



The short answer is; by doing what you know you really don't want to do.

Working on the development of a subconscious function is taxing and a little akin to going to the gym. It's uncomfortable because it's underused and therefore ineffective.

What such a person needs to decide is whether or not they want to change who they are as a person. Because shifting from an NiFe-Ti to an NiFe-Fe, for instance, involves a shift in beliefs/values/ideas just as much as a strengthening in certain neural pathways.

It's an alchemical journey, which involves getting over one's resistance to others; to experiences, closeness, vulnerability, spontaneity, uncertainty, failure, etc. It involves letting go of paradigms and ideas, questioning and revising assumptions (Pe), engaging in a reciprocal exchange with the dynamic world (Je) and so on.

Needless to say, this will likely sound somewhat revolting to a very intense NiTi, because it represents all the things they have resistance against (FeSe); identity-wise and about the world.

But something in them already knows - and has known - that they are hiding in the pseudo-dispassionate place they are, not because it's who they are and that's that, but out of a deeply felt incompetence and an avoidance of their calling for improvement.

Well, I consider myself NiTi, and it's not that those things sound revolting - rather, I have a kind of fear regarding them. It sounds like something I want, but the vulnerability and things that go with that sound like a lot.

I've been trying to locate and question my assumptions but I find it far too difficult to isolate which assumptions I am operating under exactly. I started doing this when I received some cognitive behavioural therapy in the area but I didn't get too far with it.

I think I'm in a different spot because I want to be more Fe and better able to engage with others but, and it may largely be due to anxiety, I find it very difficult to know how to really do it. It's a resistance to expression, probably because I anticipate a mostly negative response to what I am going to express, so I prefer to stick with more basic modes of expression which I perceive as safer.

 

[ivan]

Pragmatically speaking, there are some individuals who could be called NiTi, in the sense that they give mental priority to Ti over Fe, even if the resting state of their psychology would be Ni-Fe-Ti-Se. There's always a deeper reason for this type of distortion, as NiTi isn't a naturally occurring hierarchy.

NiTi is a shorthand for the NiFe-Ti subtype, but their general attitude will indeed be I+N+T not I+N+F. So they'll often type as INTx in preference-based systems.



The short answer is; by doing what you know you really don't want to do.

Working on the development of a subconscious function is taxing and a little akin to going to the gym. It's uncomfortable because it's underused and therefore ineffective.

What such a person needs to decide is whether or not they want to change who they are as a person. Because shifting from an NiFe-Ti to an NiFe-Fe, for instance, involves a shift in beliefs/values/ideas just as much as a strengthening in certain neural pathways.

It's an alchemical journey, which involves getting over one's resistance to others; to experiences, closeness, vulnerability, spontaneity, uncertainty, failure, etc. It involves letting go of paradigms and ideas, questioning and revising assumptions (Pe), engaging in a reciprocal exchange with the dynamic world (Je) and so on.

Needless to say, this will likely sound somewhat revolting to a very intense NiTi, because it represents all the things they have resistance against (FeSe); identity-wise and about the world.

But something in them already knows - and has known - that they are hiding in the pseudo-dispassionate place they are, not because it's who they are and that's that, but out of a deeply felt incompetence and an avoidance of their calling for improvement.

Auburn, you explanations are so good, they change my perspective on how i view cognitive functions.
I would like to ask you one more question if possible. So I realized that my ISTJ friend studies a lot but barely gets average grades. I am assuming he that he stores information there. (He is always concentrated, hard to make him change his mind, conservative..) My other ENTP friend is just a genius. He is super smart and school for him is easy. He got 100% for all of his classes last semester. and same thing with this semester so far. He says school is easy for him. He reads a textbook once and he always gets 100% on exams. When I observe him I can see he uses his Ne. It is really hard to explain using words. He is witty, knows almost everything. But his SI is not mature so he cant even remember where I parked my car in walmart parking lot and cant recall other people`s names.
How should INTP study to be successful in school. When talk about a novel in English class I imagine it in my Ne. But it is not vivid enough. When I smoke pot my imagination becomes more vivid and thats when I become interested in studying.
When I sit in class I use Ti just to compare if what the pro says is true which is not that good at storing it in my mind. How should I use Ne to be more like ENTP?
Is it true that intuitive people are way smarter then "sensing" people?

 

[Architect]

Different. Since we have no way of observing Ti operate without the use of either Ni/Se or Ne/Si then, practically speaking, it's always tinged by the perception pairing adjacent to it. The psyche operates as a whole, with every component colouring every other.

The Ti of the TiNe and the TiSe may be, in principle, identical, but in practice/observation/behavior they always carry a different quality and focus.

Good thoughts here, something I've pondered as observations of ISTP's show a Ti which appears different from the INTP Ti. Is it just expression or is it also the 'nature' of the differing individuals Ti? I think it probably has to be the latter.

First it gets into what Ti is exactly. My theory is that Ti is a psychic arrangement of information flow much as you describe above. This manifests as a motivation to behave a particular way (e.g. the Ti configuration encourages an INTP to think). Over time a person develops a mind (wet-ware neural nets) which is more or less a reflection of the type (and their life influences). Nurture and nature. I have no doubt one day when we map the conectome we'll see the functions patterned there - differently for different types and individuals however (and we'll see that a baby hasn't developed the neocortex function patterns yet).

So from this standpoint, the wet-ware Ti of an INTP will develop quite differently from the wet-ware Ti of an ISTP, since the INTP will expose themselves more to things like philosophy and theory. The ISTP Ti will be more adapted to physical/gadget operation and theory.

 

[Auburn]

First it gets into what Ti is exactly. My theory is that Ti is a psychic arrangement of information flow much as you describe above. This manifests as a motivation to behave a particular way (e.g. the Ti configuration encourages an INTP to think).

More or less. What I find to be a likely discovery is that the brain utilizes large scale cross-region networks in the brain to complete complex thoughts. This is what Nardi calls "brain circuits"

I recently came across a very curious study about how the brain organizes its operations mathematically:

Neuroscientists Say Simple Mathematical Logic Underlies Complex Brain Computations

“Groups of cliques then cluster into functional connectivity motifs (FCMs) to handle every possibility in each of these basics. The more complex the thought, the more cliques join in.”
​

The connectome project is identifying a hundred+ sections in the brain, but the cognitive functions are very likely the modalities the brain utilizes to accomplish tasks at a high level of conceptualization. Thus they involve a variety of regions into a type of collective goal/dance/rhythm. I think of it like an orchestra being lead by the conductor.

[bimgx=200]http://imgur.com/kGJnHGs.jpg[/bimgx]

For example, the mind of a Ti-lead is likely constantly looping between F3+F4+F1. This is not surprising considering Ti is itself already a conglomerate between J+T+I.

But by that logic, the 'function' would, at the root, have to be that piece of wet-ware that tells the brain to organize itself in this way, no? Some sort of genetics must be involved in this orchestration; and the end behavioral effects are only the result of a very long chain of events.

This is why I think that -- while it remains a prevailing hypothesis atm -- the notion of the brain as decentralizes is somewhat lacking. If the brain is organized in a specific way, then consciousness isn't an arbitrarily emergent phenomenon from the decentralized interaction of different brain regions or circuits. There's levels of structure innate to it, composed of specialized subsystems that group together. Like so:

Spoiler

The spheres at the bottom are all the connectome regions. The yellow balls in the air are the way those regions conglomerate to create more complex-order tasks. So it's kinda like a business, with workers working below managers. The managers then have higher managers on top of them, and the CEO is "you" but you are composed really of a type of round-table council. So "you" is a type of "collective" of psychic vectors, but by the time they reach your consciousness directly, there are only a handful of very prominent voices. Because the CEO (us) can't handle every little task happening down below, even in its own mind, so we weigh decisions in a binary way between members of our council like Mr.F over here and Mr.T over here. And maybe Mr.T is our vice-president while Mr.F is a bit of a low-tier manager (T>F).

So this is just my best estimation/suspicion atm, put in metaphor.
I've got a lot to learn about brain circuits. c_c

 

[Black Rose]

I think that different functions belong together as attractors.

I would like to know what the attractor network would be for INFJ.

INFJ also has Ti,

Auburn what does the INFJ brain look like?

(you already showed the INTP brain on the EEG)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attractor_network

http://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms9414

 

[Architect]

but the cognitive functions are very likely the modalities the brain utilizes to accomplish tasks at a high level of conceptualization. Thus they involve a variety of regions into a type of collective goal/dance/rhythm. I think of it like an orchestra being lead by the conductor.

For example, the mind of a Ti-lead is likely constantly looping between F3+F4+F1. This is not surprising considering Ti is itself already a conglomerate between J+T+I. ...

So if I follow your theory you posit that MBTI has specific regions of the brain that it uses to operate. Three problems with that; one your example diagram is 2D, what you need is a 3D model. Where are these regions? Pure neocortex, or deeper in the cortex?

The second problem is you haven't defined what the functions are. You say they are modalities and give an example, but that's self referential. In my model the functions have two parts - one innate part which is hardwired, probably in the cortex, and has to do with information flow into the brain (e.g. an extraverted feeler has a higher tolerance (=wider bandwidth) for exterior feeling type information (information from those around us). Secondly over time that develops a set of functions in the neocortex. So we need some kind of reference for what you exactly mean by a function to have a theory.

The third problem with that theory is that you have to explain how the neocortex will happily move capabilities around. When a person has a stroke and loses language function, they can gain it back by reprogramming a different region of the neocortex. This implies that while certain general functions may tend to be in a particular place of the brain (e.g. sight, hearing), it isn't necessary for them to be there. So, the neocortex is malleable.

But by that logic, the 'function' would, at the root, have to be that piece of wet-ware that tells the brain to organize itself in this way, no? Some sort of genetics must be involved in this orchestration; and the end behavioral effects are only the result of a very long chain of events.

Possibly, but while the largest portion of the genome is devoted to the brain, its simply encoding on how to make neurons and so forth (structural not semantic). That is if you look at the content of the brain (information theory viewpoint) it exceeds that of the genome by many orders of magnitude (10^9 vs 10^6 I believe). So any ideas that the genome a-priori determines brain function is on shaky ground.

 

[Auburn]

@Architect - Ah, a few clarifications are in order. My hypothesis (wouldn't really call it a theory yet) for the neurological placement of the functions isn't contingent on locality. By that I mean Te isn't "this and that region". But Te uses "this and that" region to accomplish its task, because Te is a global operation designed to accomplish a specific task.

Given what we've learned from neuroplasticity, we can say that while the brain has a localized template that it likes to grow into --- with region-specific functions --- that can change depending on physical trauma or (so I've read) even something like right/left handedness.

So we can probably better think of neurons, more generally, as processing potential/bandwidth; ready to be assigned to certain tasks. Now, my hypothesis is that the genome contains the instructions to adjust the given processing potential available in the species, to suit the needs of constructing a consciousness, for the operation of the organism.

So the genome says "we need a working memory; give me 10 million neurons for that. we need visual processing; give me another 20 million for that." And the brain assigns accordingly. Once assigned, they become grandfathered that way so it's hard to move info around later.

So while technically, different people can have their operations in different places; for the rest of their life, they'll likely keep using said regions for their tasks. Unless trauma; then readjusting occurs because the brain reassigns resources in order to have all the components needed for consciousness.

(That hypothesis would, I think, align with what we know about our evolution into hominin. Because it appears that the main difference between us and other mammals like Chimps is that we have a lot more mental bandwidth to work with.)

Going back to the functions, some of the necessary "assignments" made would be of a region for memory recollection (Pi), logistical execution (Je), internal consistency (Ji), and registration of outer stimuli (Pe). And there are likely more than these 4.

***
​

In conclusion/TL'DR: The algorithm of human consciousness grows itself into our available neural space; it unpacks itself with all the tools it needs for operation, much like a CEO would hire a team for managing hir business. The specific locations are not so important, just like the cubicles aren't. But the presence of each worker is, as well as what they are assigned to produce together.

So there are dozens of smaller parts (employees) each doing simplistic tasks. And they come together to form large-scale operations. So to actually perform memory recall maybe it takes like 5 cubicles: access of visual archive, data comparison for similarity, data projection into the mind, etc. But the psyche must do this large-scale operation -- which we call Pi -- in all humans because we all need to perform that function. So Pi isn't really a physical "thing" but it's a necessary modality of operation that is innate to the human phenomenological experience.

 

[Shieru]

along the lines of what Auburn seems to be describing, i think a function is an electro-chemical pattern - ultimately resulting in reinforced neural networks - which operates to fulfill a certain task, e.g. 'memory' or 'logos'. it isn't the particular neurons involved as much as it is the pattern of activity and how that pattern relates to the other operations of the brain.

i also think that these patterns do originate from our genetics, but it may be difficult to discern, because they do so in a subtle way. it could be that the genome establishes the primary equation of a function - something relatively simple. then through a feedback-loop (the pattern with which neural paths are generated in the developing brain) the function is built as a self-similar phenomenon. this would make sense in context of what we know about how organic forms manifest, the brain being a highly complex organic structure. if the process is fractal in nature, it could explain why the information in the genome isn't 1:1 with the structure and operation of the functions.

as for the difference between Ti's operation when paired with Ne and Se, i think it may be about how the functions tend to dynamically influence each other. i've noticed an interesting phenomenon in NiFe (INFJs), where although Fe is technically more prominent than Ti in their psyche, they often express Ti in much the same way as TiNe (INTPs). many of them appear rather logical for 'feeling' types. it seems to me like Ti may have an affinity for collaborating with the intuitive function. this could be due to the fact that both functions operate internally; intuition is ultimately an internally-focused process of association, even if it's expression is projected onto external objects, as with Ne.

similarly, i've often seen it where TiSe are more integrated with their Fe than TiNe. it seems that Se and Fe tend to collaborate - perhaps because Se's literal awareness of the physical environment coincides with Fe's external awareness of people. it seems to me that the differences between Ti in these cases are likely due to the dynamic interaction and amplification of the functions, rather than an innate structural difference. of course, over time this would attribute to Ti assimilating different information into its framework, and interacting in different manners and proportions with Fe and the perception functions. this, though, would be more categorized as a difference in overall personality than a difference in singular function operation.

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

Regarding differing Ti in INTP and ISTP: Dario Nardio found 4 kinds of Ti logic that are used, and INTP and ISTP emphasise different ones of these 4.