For the why (end goal) vs how (methods) I'll make a connection here to Reinin dichotomies of tactical vs strategic thinking to give you guys some more stuff to think about :P
Tactical mode of thinking focuses on the methods while goals are kept variable and not the main concern. Strategic thinking focuses on achieving a goal while methods to achieve it are not as important and vary. Tacticals have inert intuition and contact sensing. Strategic types have intuition in the contact function position and sensing in the intert position. In other words, types that have intuition as their dominant or tertiary are given into tactical thinking. Types who intuition is auxiliary or inferior are given into strategic thinking.
Tactical types are: ENTP, ENFP, ESFJ, ESTJ, ISTP, ISFP, INFJ, INTJ
Stategic types are: ENFJ, ENTJ, INFP, INTP, ESTP, ESFP, ISTJ, ISFJ
I found this quite interesting as I play an mmo game where coming up with new tactics is a goal of the gaming group I belong to and the interesting bit is that it is usually the ENTJ, INTP and ESTP in the group who come up with new tactics and engage in a lot of debate over these. I've once witnessed INTJ debate with the ENTJ where the core of INTJ's argument was that goals are variable while for ENTJ it was clear that there was one goal.
Popular perverted usage of extravert = a dominant alpha person (e.g. outgoing)
Popular perverted usage of introvert = a submissive beta person (e.g. shy)
(That's why everybody wants to be extravert)
But Jung invented the words introvert/extravert himself, and his original definition is totally different!:
extravert=objective person
introvert=subjective person
It is more accurate to say that extravert is a more objective person than introvert as nobody is really just an extravert or introvert. All of us use a combination of extraverted and introverted functions.
Another popular definition is that extraversion = going to parties and socializing. This is true for F-type extraverts, especially Fe ones, because due to having F function as dominant or auxiliary their mind places value on people and relationships, so their extraversion usually includes those elements. This is not really true of T-type extraverts whose extraversion does not place that much value on people. Extraversion is really just interaction with environment and the switch between the two happens instantly. As I am typing this I am pausing and going inside my mind to retrieve more information - this is introversion. Then I come back and start typing - this is me interacting with environment i.e. extraversion. The mind very rapidly switches between the two states.
skywalker, I see what your saying, but I thought that INTPs are notoriously objective people? Who always try to look at things objectively and are thus very good at being researchers and scientists. Perhaps I don't understand what is meant by it very well then.
It depends on your definition of objective. There seem to be several different definitions floating around. One is that word objective means aimed at and interacting with objects outside of self. Second definition is that objective is making decisions based on outside facts and not considering own sentiments. By first definition all extraverted functions are objective and all introverted ones are subjective, so INTP's dominant function Ti is thus subjective while auxiliary function Ne is objective (nobody is only introvert or extravert but INTP's thinking will be dominated by the subjective element Ti). By second definition Ti does not fulfill first requirement as making decisions based on outside fact is Te not Ti. However it does fulfill second requirements of not making judgements based on own sentiments as this is domain of Fi rather than Ti. Of course you can also consider inner logic to be "own sentiment" which would once again make Ti not fall under this definition of objective.
