Ti-dom = P-dom (P-dom does not exist, MBTI is wrong)

[SkyWalker]

Te pursues the pleasure of task completion
> Te manifests/finishes/single-tasks

Ti avoids the pain of the wrong task.
> Ti procrastinates/complicates/philosophizes/switches-tasks/multi-tasks

I think all xxxP types have more Ti, thats why they seem to keep on perceiving instead of deciding.

Thus P-dom of MBTI is Ti-dom. There is no P-dom. It is a mistake invented by the girls meyers-briggs, because they didnt understand Ti. Jung also never mentioned that J & P compete for attention.

 

[Cogwulf]

What? MBTI never mentioned p-dom anywhere. J and P just dictate the order of functions.

Being P means Ti is dominant in INTPs. P-dom doesn't exist.

 

[BigApplePi]

What? MBTI never mentioned p-dom anywhere. J and P just dictate the order of functions.

Being P means Ti is dominant in INTPs. P-dom doesn't exist.

Not sure what you guys are talking about. What are we starting with? Ti? If so, there are only two Ti's: INTP & ISTP. Both are P's. So if Ti is dominant that implies P. Isn't it a matter of language then to say P is "dominant" given Ti? What does it matter if others mention it or not? P is dominant unless you want to say "conclusive" instead.

I have more to say about this depending on what you say.

 

[tikru]

Te pursues the pleasure of task completion
> Te manifests/finishes/single-tasks

Ti avoids the pain of the wrong task.
> Ti procrastinates/complicates/philosophizes/switches-tasks/multi-tasks

I think all xxxP types have more Ti, thats why they seem to keep on perceiving instead of deciding.

Thus P-dom of MBTI is Ti-dom. There is no P-dom. It is a mistake invented by the girls meyers-briggs, because they didnt understand Ti. Jung also never mentioned that J & P compete for attention.

Why reduce p-types to the use of Ti? Take an INFP, for example. The combination of Fi-Ne is similar to the combination of Ti-Ne. They are both Introverted Judgement/Extroverted Perception. It's not a matter of having Ti, rather it is the act of percieving and then judging based on internal values/logic.

 

[Cogwulf]

Not sure what you guys are talking about. What are we starting with? Ti? If so, there are only two Ti's: INTP & ISTP. Both are P's. So if Ti is dominant that implies P. Isn't it a matter of language then to say P is "dominant" given Ti? What does it matter if others mention it or not? P is dominant unless you want to say "conclusive" instead.

I have more to say about this depending on what you say.

I think skywalker thinks that Perceiving is a function

 

[BigApplePi]

I think skywalker thinks that Perceiving is a function

What is it then?

 

[Cogwulf]

It denotes preferred order of functions.

 

[ElvenVeil]

While E/I determines if your primary function is an extroverted or an Introverted one

 

[EyeSeeCold]

I think skywalker thinks that Perceiving is a function

What is it then?

It denotes preferred order of functions.

Yes, but then what does it mean for a function to be a judging function? To be a perceiving function?

While E/I determines if your primary function is an extroverted or an Introverted one

So the Four letter code determines type and not functions determine type?

XNTP vs TxNySxFy

Tell me, if Extraverted means an extraverted attitude and Introverted means and introverted attitude, shouldn't E/I determine the direction of function energy and not the Four letter code?

E/I NTP=======ENTP, INTP== NeTiFeSi, TiNeSiFe
E/I TxNySxFy===ENTJ, INTP===TeNiSeFi TiNeSiFe

Which one makes more sense?


(btw, I think I agree Luke, your point isn't really clear though)

 

[SkyWalker]

I think skywalker thinks that Perceiving is a function

No I dont, I know its 4 functions (Se, Si, Ne, Ni).

I also know each 4-letter-MBTI-combo is just a different ordering of the 8 functions. I just think there are wrong assumptions in that default way of ordering in the way MBTI does. I do like the 8 functions as a theory. But I just question the MBTI ordering assumptions of those 8 functions a lot.

I noticed that strong Ti results in a personality that correlates with xxxP
Somebody said something about Fi, which also correlates with xxxP, I guess that could be true too
That would mean more P-ness is more Ti or more Fi, not just Ti. But that would still mean that P-ness does not exist, it would then just be Ti-ness/Fi-ness which generates P-ness.

This difference of placing a P-function before or after a J-function and that having effect on the personality is something I cannot grasp or fail to assume. To say TiNe is different than NeTi is just something I cannot assume like that, I dont know if this is really true (the ordering of functions like that).

 

[EyeSeeCold]

No I dont, I know its 4 functions (Se, Si, Ne, Ni).

I also know each 4-letter-MBTI-combo is just a different ordering of the 8 functions. I just think there are wrong assumptions in that default way of ordering in the way MBTI does. I do like the 8 functions as a theory. But I just question the MBTI ordering assumptions of those 8 functions a lot.

I noticed that strong Ti results in a personality that correlates with xxxP
Somebody said something about Fi, which also correlates with xxxP, I guess that could be true too
That would mean more P-ness is more Ti or more Fi, not just Ti. But that would still mean that P-ness does not exist, it would then just be Ti-ness/Fi-ness which generates P-ness.

This difference of placing a P-function before or after a J-function and that having effect on the personality is something I cannot grasp or fail to assume. To say TiNe is different than NeTi is just something I cannot assume like that, I dont know if this is really true (the ordering of functions like that).

Basically what you are saying is that the dominant function determines a type's main attitude correct?

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

this thread makes no sense wut

 

[ElvenVeil]

So the Four letter code determines type and not functions determine type?

XNTP vs TxNySxFy

Tell me, if Extraverted means an extraverted attitude and Introverted means and introverted attitude, shouldn't E/I determine the direction of function energy and not the Four letter code?

E/I NTP=======ENTP, INTP== NeTiFeSi, TiNeSiFe
E/I TxNySxFy===ENTJ, INTP===TeNiSeFi TiNeSiFe

Which one makes more sense?

hmm.. I don't see how your two options, in the question, are not both possible
your question is a little confusing as you make it sound like I am not saying that E/I determines focus direction. What I said in the previous post was that E/I determines if your primary function is either introvert or extravert.. that must if anything mean that E/I determines the direction of function energy .. so to that bit; yes.

being introverted naturally also says something about you in itself - you store up new energy by being alone and not by being with others.

'So the Four letter code determines type and not functions determine type'

in short, yes the four letter code determines type.. but you seem to be looking at this some sort of upside down way ?
We have a system that is based on observation of functions. that observation results in 4 letter code = MBTI type
in other words TiNeSiFe = INTP .. so there is no disconection between my two options as they are equal one another.

iirc MBTI works on 80% (this may naturally vary of how you regard the MBTI system) of the population so there is naturally a diversity in how this works. I myself argue that functions in the same types can be used more or less frequent/ and on different levels (for instance using Ti a little less and Si a little more). So naturally the more correct you wish to be about your own functions the more precise you will become. But that , imo , does not change that Ti/Ne/Si/Fe = INTP , works the majority of the time .

'E/I NTP=======ENTP, INTP== NeTiFeSi, TiNeSiFe
E/I TxNySxFy===ENTJ, INTP===TeNiSeFi TiNeSiFe'

let's see.. the first bit you enter the standard MBTI version. That one makes good sense to me.

Now you are working with 'X'es' in the second bit .. that naturally results in a huge difference when it comes to the 4 letter code.. That is also why I personally denies x as an actual option. . and rather look at the system like this - the person is introvert, but not very much so . . he is therefore still an TiNeSiFe .. it is not impossible that he is using his Ne more than the avarage INTP. -

So if I review what you might be saying then you are saying that the letter combination has it's flaws when it comes to the 'x' -- and that is correct

 

[Jennywocky]

I also know each 4-letter-MBTI-combo is just a different ordering of the 8 functions. I just think there are wrong assumptions in that default way of ordering in the way MBTI does. I do like the 8 functions as a theory. But I just question the MBTI ordering assumptions of those 8 functions a lot.

Feel free to question them, it's just a theory... but if you make up your own, it's no longer MBTI, it's just your own theory.

Likewise, no one can prove that there are eight and only eight functions that cover all of human behavior and that these are the eight functions that exist. It's just merely one useful framework of looking at human personality, but there are others as well.

I noticed that strong Ti results in a personality that correlates with xxxP. Somebody said something about Fi, which also correlates with xxxP, I guess that could be true too. That would mean more P-ness is more Ti or more Fi, not just Ti. But that would still mean that P-ness does not exist, it would then just be Ti-ness/Fi-ness which generates P-ness.

All that Myers was doing with the J/P thing was describing "closure/openness," which in turn impacts which function is extroverted. (Introverts has an introverted primary, which means their observable function is the extroverted secondary.) Jung never used J/P, he just had categories of judging and perceiving into which he lumped the functions. What's funny is that it does seem to be applicable to large numbers of people; ISFJs DO exude a lot of closure from the Fe secondary, while INTPs do not due to the Ne secondary... unless you get them to engage their primary (which happens a lot on online forums -- Ti has a chance to come out and express itself clearly).

This difference of placing a P-function before or after a J-function and that having effect on the personality is something I cannot grasp

If you have an introverted judging function as your primary, you still can't function without having some sort of perceptive function and a function aimed at the external environment. This is all the primary/secondary opposing pairs assumes: That all ground must be covered if someone is to function clearly. When people don't have a judging and perceiving function working together and covering both the introverted and extroverted spheres, they usually do not function in a healthy manner... they have large gaps in their functional ability.

or fail to assume.

You can assume it's true just in terms of the theory, although whether it is explicitly and specifically true IRL for everyone, that's hard to say.

To say TiNe is different than NeTi is just something I cannot assume like that, I dont know if this is really true (the ordering of functions like that).

All you have to learn is the theory. What you are stating is nomenclature, just like in music we can describe A5 or C3 (musical notes); and according to the nomenclature, those two combinations you list operate somewhat differently, just like both of those notes sound different when you hear them.

There is a difference being described by the nomenclature of TiNe vs NeTi, just as much as if you and a friend went on a car ride, and on the way there one of you drove and on the way back you switched places; you might get to the same destination, and together you've got the same qualities/toolsets, but the driving would probably look a bit different depending on which one of you actually was behind the wheel.

 

[BigApplePi]

this thread makes no sense wut

Artsu. I lot of this thread makes no sense to me, but your statement about sense does makes sense to me.

I think there is a confusion because words like, "four letters" and "determines" have not clearly been related to cause and effect. Do we want to talk cause and effect or what?

 

[SkyWalker]

@Jenny:

Most of your reply makes a lot of sense to me, and I thank you very much for it.

Except this last part, which I do not understand. How can you say this? Or am I missing something here?:

There is a difference being described by the nomenclature of TiNe vs NeTi, just as much as if you and a friend went on a car ride, and on the way there one of you drove and on the way back you switched places; you might get to the same destination, and together you've got the same qualities/toolsets, but the driving would probably look a bit different depending on which one of you actually was behind the wheel.

From the definitions of the J and P functions:

- The Judging function manifests in reality (by decisions/judgements (that cause action), a.k.a. rational), it is an output function.

- The Perception function just perceives and does not manifest in reality (makes no jugements/decisions, a.k.a. irrational), it is an input function

So...

- Judging functions steer only (steering=manifesting/deciding/judging)

- Perceiving functions perceive the road only.

analogy: J is without eyes, and P is without hands.

In the TiNe vs NeTi case that would mean:
Ti will always be the (blind) driver, while Ne will always look out the window on behalf of Ti.

I totally dont get how they would be able to switch places. That is like saying that the input-function will cause the output, while the output-function will provide the input. Thats just weird? That is like putting the eyeless J-man on the outlook, while the handless P-man takes the wheel.

 

[Logic]

Ti-dom = P-dom (P-dom does not exist, MBTI is wrong)

What do you mean by P-Dom?

Are you talking about the top two functions of a personality type? (Right-Brain)

XXXP types?

OR

Are you talking about dominant perceiving functions? (N / S)

EXXP's and IXXJ's?

Te pursues the pleasure of task completion
> Te manifests/finishes/single-tasks

Ti avoids the pain of the wrong task.
> Ti procrastinates/complicates/philosophizes/switches-tasks/multi-tasks

Your still trying to understand the functions through your understanding of computers. It won't work my friend. They are 2 different things. The cognitive functions are very complex and odd to say the least. Computers are far more linear.

Tasks...

I think all xxxP types have more Ti, thats why they seem to keep on perceiving instead of deciding.

It isn't possible. To have Ti you must be a personality type that has it. To say you have "more" or "less" Ti is in itself wrong. Either you have the Ti function or you don't.

Only XXTP's and XXFJ's have the Ti function.

However you can have a more developed Ti function compared to another Ti user. That depends on the use of the other functions as well though and It only works when comparing two people of the same type.

To be a perceiving type doesn't automatically mean you have the Ti function. There is also the Fi function as well as the Ne and Se functions.

Thus P-dom of MBTI is Ti-dom. There is no P-dom. It is a mistake invented by the girls meyers-briggs, because they didnt understand Ti. Jung also never mentioned that J & P compete for attention.

Ok, There are two different meanings to the terms Perceiving and Judging and I'll break them both down.

First Meaning

Based on the MBTI system, The Judging type is a personality type that favors the Left Brain Functions as the top two functions where as the Perceiving type favors right brain functions.

Judging = Directive Functions = Left Hemisphere = Structure = Te, Fe, Si, Ni
Perceiving = Adaptive Functions = Right Hemisphere = Free-Form = Ti, Fi, Se, Ne

Second Meaning

Based on the behavior of different functions. The Judging Functions are the Thinking and Feeling Functions because they Evaluate Data. The Perceiving Functions are the Sensing and Intuition Functions because they Take in Data.

Judging = Ti, Te, Fi, Fe = Evaluates Data
Perceiving = Si, Se, Ni, Ne = Takes in Data

Compete for attention?

No I dont, I know its 4 functions (Se, Si, Ne, Ni).

First you were talking about Judging and Perceiving based on the First Meaning and now your talking about Perceiving and Judging based on their Second Meaning. What a tangled web.

I also know each 4-letter-MBTI-combo is just a different ordering of the 8 functions. I just think there are wrong assumptions in that default way of ordering in the way MBTI does. I do like the 8 functions as a theory. But I just question the MBTI ordering assumptions of those 8 functions a lot.

It is because you don't understand how to interpret the system. It actually makes sense as to how the MBTI letter code works in determining the functions of a particular personalty.

Lets take the INTP letter code and try determining the cognitive functions this personality has, and in what order.

I = Dominant function will be an introverted one.
N = One of the top two functions will be an Intuitive function.
T = One of the top two functions will be a Thinking function.
P = This Personality will favor Right Brain functions rather then Left Brain functions for its top two functions. (Ti,Fi,Ne,Se)

Based on this. It is inescapable that the INTP letter code will result in the cognitive functions in this particular arrangement: Ti, Ne, Si, Fe.

The last two functions are determined easily once the top two functions have been established.

I noticed that strong Ti results in a personality that correlates with xxxP
Somebody said something about Fi, which also correlates with xxxP, I guess that could be true too

Assuming "Pness" = Right Brain Functions

Ti,Fi,Se,Ne all correlate with "Pness" Assuming you are looking at it from the MBTI system understanding.

That would mean more P-ness is more Ti or more Fi, not just Ti. But that would still mean that P-ness does not exist, it would then just be Ti-ness/Fi-ness which generates P-ness.

"Pness" just means the given personality favors the top two functions as right-brain functions. Stop associating only Fi and Ti with "Pness", it is incomplete and incorrect.

This difference of placing a P-function before or after a J-function and that having effect on the personality is something I cannot grasp or fail to assume. To say TiNe is different than NeTi is just something I cannot assume like that, I dont know if this is really true (the ordering of functions like that).

Your thinking of it in terms of the second meaning now. Which is why your getting confused. Stick to the First Meaning when your talking about MBTI.

From the definitions of the J and P functions:

- The Judging function manifests in reality (by decisions/judgements (that cause action), a.k.a. rational), it is an output function.

Assuming you are referring to the Second Meaning.

No function is an output function. A judging function merely evaluates the data which has been fed in by the perceiving function.

- The Perception function just perceives and does not manifest in reality (makes no jugements/decisions, a.k.a. irrational), it is an input function

Again, Input/Output is only going to confuse you, you cannot view it from that perspective. Whether a function manifests in reality or not, is not the concern here, just remember that Perceiving Functions "take in raw information".

So...

- Judging functions steer only (steering=manifesting/deciding/judging)

- Perceiving functions perceive the road only.

analogy: J is without eyes, and P is without hands.

If your going to interpret this analogy in the most simplest of terms for the sake of helping you understand, then sure. I would rather say that J is with the hands and P is with the eyes.

In the TiNe vs NeTi case that would mean:
Ti will always be the (blind) driver, while Ne will always look out the window on behalf of Ti.

I totally dont get how they would be able to switch places. That is like saying that the input-function will cause the output, while the output-function will provide the input. Thats just weird? That is like putting the eyeless J-man on the outlook, while the handless P-man takes the wheel.

Both Ti and Ne work in tandem. For the INTP the Ti function is in the front where as the Ne function is in the back. The INTP is more stimulated in rearranging their understanding (Ti) rather then taking in new information.(Ne) The ENTP is the opposite in that respect.

 

[ElvenVeil]

just to avoid a minor confusion in the above post: all people have Ti.. it is not bound to certain personality types. Every single person has all 8 functions . . The question is what your preference is. As far as I know Ti / Ne can be regarded as the INTP's dominant functions. Then usually with age you will mainly have increased your use of your tertiary preference and your inferior preference. But as all people have all functions the INTP looks like this: Ti, Ne, Si, Fe, Te, Ni, Se, Fi

 

[Logic]

just to avoid a minor confusion in the above post: all people have Ti.. it is not bound to certain personality types. Every single person has all 8 functions . . The question is what your preference is. As far as I know Ti / Ne can be regarded as the INTP's dominant functions. Then usually with age you will mainly have increased your use of your tertiary preference and your inferior preference. But as all people have all functions the INTP looks like this: Ti, Ne, Si, Fe, Te, Ni, Se, Fi

It is not possible to use all 8 functions.

We only have access to 4 cognitive functions. which are referred to as the conscious functions or primary functions. The other 4 functions are subconscious and we cannot access them or use them in any way.

If we did have access to all of them, we would not be able to function properly.

 

[Jennywocky]

I think we should step back and look at ourselves realistically, as we actually operate, rather than applying theoretical concepts over our actual life experience.

 

[Words]

It is not possible to use all 8 functions.

So you're saying that I can't subjectively evaluate things which is Fi?

 

[SkyWalker]

It is not possible to use all 8 functions.

We only have access to 4 cognitive functions. which are referred to as the conscious functions or primary functions. The other 4 functions are subconscious and we cannot access them or use them in any way.

If we did have access to all of them, we would not be able to function properly.

Where did you get that information, is it classic MBTI/Jung literature? which book? which chapter? Or is it your own opinion?

Jung said they were USUALLY unconsious (UN and not SUBconscious btw) because they were underdeveloped, he never said they were not there.

I cant agree with you on this one. I think we can use all 8, just not in the same snapshot/moment of time. I can't use 2 opposites at the same time, i agree on this:Ti & Te at the same time is impossible. But I could first use Te and then later use Ti (alternating yes, but never both at the same time). If I am a Ti-dom then i would usually use Ti instead of Te, thats why its called Ti-dom and not just Ti-only.

 

[Logic]

I think we should step back and look at ourselves realistically, as we actually operate, rather than applying theoretical concepts over our actual life experience.

You seem like you may be interested in Pod'Lair.

So you're saying that I can't subjectively evaluate things which is Fi?

Assuming you are an INTP Words, If you ever do an internal evaluation (Introverted Judgment) you are only ever using your Ti function.

Have you actually thought about being able to use both Ti and Fi? Even theoretically it doesnt make sense, let alone work. Internally you have to either make judgments from Ti or Fi. You cannot place a value based decision onto something and also put a logic based decision on it as well. They contradict one another. It's like trying to look left and right at the same time.

The same goes for any of the other functions as well. Se and Ne, Ni and Si, Te and Fe. You can only have 1 compass, 1 stimulus, 1 worldview, and 1 dynamic function.

If the INTP ever places a value judgment on anything, it will always come in the form of Fe.

Where did you get that information, is it classic MBTI/Jung literature? which book? which chapter? Or is it your own opinion?

Jung said they were USUALLY unconsious (UN and not SUBconscious btw) because they were underdeveloped, he never said they were not there.

I cant agree with you on this one. I think we can use all 8, just not in the same snapshot/moment of time. I can't use 2 opposites at the same time, i agree on this:Ti & Te at the same time is impossible. But I could first use Te and then later use Ti (alternating yes, but never both at the same time). If I am a Ti-dom then i would usually use Ti instead of Te, thats why its called Ti-dom and not just Ti-only.

A lot of what Adymus says makes sense to me. There was actually a very specific post that was made by him (I don't remember the thread) that went into why we only have use of 4 functions, but I feel as though I already mentioned the important bit.

If your talking about whether they physically exist in the brain, then I agree with you. However we do not have access to any of them, but that's ok since we don't need any of them.

Not only is it not possible to use Ti and Te at the same time, but it is also not possible to alternate from using one to the other. We already have an extroverted judgment function, its called Fe. When we are ever involved in outer dynamics we are using that function.

To be a Ti-Dom simply means you have the Ti function as your most stimulating/dominant function, thats all it means. So IXTP types fit this bill.

 

[SkyWalker]

@Logic> Aha, so your only source of this is some old post by Adymus, but you think it makes sense. I will try to find the post.

 

[Words]

Have you actually thought about being able to use both Ti and Fi? Even theoretically it doesnt make sense, let alone work.

I don't see that. How?

Internally you have to either make judgments from Ti or Fi. You cannot place a value based decision onto something and also put a logic based decision on it as well. They contradict one another. It's like trying to look left and right at the same time.

How so?

I can subjectively value an old amulet and logicize that my attachment is based on sentiment but deem the behavior rational, can't I?

The same goes for any of the other functions as well. Se and Ne, Ni and Si, Te and Fe. You can only have 1 compass, 1 stimulus, 1 worldview, and 1 dynamic function.

If the INTP ever places a value judgment on anything, it will always come in the form of Fe.

Why? Why can't I experience the world in a concrete manner?

If you think of reality and of the definitions of these functions, then surely one can experience all.

 

[Logic]

I don't see that. How?

Information taken in from the Stimulus Function has to be ordered by the Compass Function.

Ti will try to order the information based on a logical criteria. You can say that the Premise or flavor or language that Ti uses is itself. Ti puts ideas together which is fundamentally based on the idea that "things must make sense in a logical way". Ti sees "right vs wrong".

Fi on the other hand bases its ideas around a value based criteria. When Fi orders information around it is based on the idea that "things must harmonize together". Fi sees "good vs bad".

Since they both look at things from these two different ways, they conflict with one another. They "butt heads" so to speak because neither function agrees with how the other function decides how the data should be arranged to create its model.

How so?

I can subjectively value an old amulet and logicize that my attachment is based on sentiment but deem the behavior rational, can't I?

No, you cannot make subjective value judgments.
Yes, you can rationalize your behavior.

If you value the amulet then you will do so by using your Fe function.

Logically you see that allowing yourself to make value based decisions is in someway acceptable to your Ti function. So basically your Ti is allowing you to make the Fe based sentiment.

INTP's need to understand things logically first and then refine that understanding to bridge the gap to the Fe function. However the gap must first be closed by the Ne function and then the Si function as well. Once the INTP has done this, they are able to grow fully, allowing their Ti function to float high like a balloon because the weight from the other three functions has been reduced.

(the analogy is from Adymus)

Why? Why can't I experience the world in a concrete manner?

You do, it comes in the form of Si.

If you think of reality and of the definitions of these functions, then surely one can experience all.

Words. you don't need the other functions. You're fine the way you are.

To simply say:

"I can see and feel therefore I am using the Se function."
"I can come up with many different ideas, that means I am using the Ne function."
or even:
"I organized this data therefore I used the Ti function."
Is completely wrong.

You have to understand that the cognitive functions are not so easy to understand like that. They go much deeper then that. A cognitive function isn't just some tool that you pick up and use. It's permanent from the moment you were born.

The MBTI test is inherently flawed in this fundamental way, because they try to determine your type based on whether, "you like to do this rather then that, therefore you are an intuitive rather then a sensor." Psshhhh, No Way.

 

[Jennywocky]

You seem like you may be interested in Pod'Lair.

Uh.... no.

(I guess you missed my extensive comments in that thread.)

 

[Words]

To simply say:

"I can see and feel therefore I am using the Se function."
"I can come up with many different ideas, that means I am using the Ne function."
or even:
"I organized this data therefore I used the Ti function."
Is completely wrong.

You have to understand that the cognitive functions are not so easy to understand like that. They go much deeper then that. A cognitive function isn't just some tool that you pick up and use. It's permanent from the moment you were born.

Well, I didn't say otherwise. I did not mean functions are not easy to understand nor are they any less deep nor are they tools you pick up nor temporary nor did I mean they are not genetical. What is "easy to understand" is relative, likewise, what is "deep" is also relative. And I agree that it is "genetical"; that's why its named "temperament." What i meant by "reality" was backing your conclusions on valid premises as oppose to a "standard" or another debatable assumption from another theory such as MBTI or any other extension or interpretation of Cognitive Functions.

Either way, based on your initial explanation of why one cannot function via Fi + Ti(and no, I refuse to acknowledge that Se which is a Pe can, in any way, come through Si which is a Pi) , I think our argument here will fall upon a case of differentiating definitions of functions, which would make this discussion more difficult, lengthy and boring.

 

[ElvenVeil]

I feel sorry for Words that he is not able to use Fi... wait that also applies to me

It somehow hits me that there may be something wrong when you claim that all people have all 8 functions but they are only permitted to use 4 of them. Why is it that this theory of yours acknowledge that every person has all 8 functions, when you claim that only 4 of them will ever show ? What 'proof' do you have of the other 4? after all

If we did have access to all of them, we would not be able to function properly.

Since they both look at things from these two different ways, they conflict with one another. They "butt heads" so to speak because neither function agrees with how the other function decides how the data should be arranged to create its model.

This logical conclusion is flawed.. you use the above as a reason 'why INTP can not use Fi'
you even say, what I am going to say, yourself so how you can conclude that they can not both work is beyond me. you claim: Ti = right vs wrong , Fi = good vs bad

now they both place a value on whatever they work with, but that does not make them contradictory..
Let's say I vote for socialist party. I can reason that with a socialist party in control, the goods and resourcess will be more equally divided and thus we have a smaller portion of the populace that will live in poverty
- That is a line of reasoning that can be labelled Ti (I btw believe every person can come up with such a reasoning!) However... It is not hard to detect that there are some personal values presented in the line of reasoning..for instance I believe that it is a good cause that we have a smaller amount of people living in poverty.. That is called Fi.. Now if you review my example then it should be clear that my primary focus lies with the Ti deduction and not with the Fi, but we can't deny that Fi playes a role in this little scenario. (INTP scenario)
It would appear this is your resons:

If the INTP ever places a value judgment on anything, it will always come in the form of Fe.

You seem to claim that Fe + Ti will be our replacement for Fi.. but there is a misunderstanding here, because that is not how Fe works. . Fe is as you can see is extraverted function. If you combine Fe + Ti , then you will with Ti see how your Fe works in situations, but you will not apply personal value with the Ti.. Fe will remain Fe and you can't just switch it to become an introverted function. If it is an introverted function it works as Fi

It would seem you are not completly clear on what Fi/Fe is. . . If we take the above into concideration then you will never have a personal opinion which focuses on (good / bad) as an INTP if we are to follow your theory.. I myself will argue that there is something wrong there..

Now to return to my example (I like the example as it shows an important thing) and it shows that both Fi and Ti are in use , but Ti is without a doubt the dominant function.. Fi is still there.
When you look at most INTP personality describtions they all seem to say that INTP's are easy going - I believe that the reason they are easy going is because they place very little personal value in things, except if it some principles that are extreemely dear to them, and if they are being violated the INTP has a habbit of taking an extreemly rigid stance - They have a minor use of Fi. . With a minor Fi they don't place value in most peoples actions and people therefore find them easy going. I have also heard/read somewhere that functions like an INTP's Fi can be trickered if they come under serious stress. That could imo, match what we see, when we see an INTP take an extreemely rigid stance when being violated on deep personal issues.

so that was a long post, but I felt the need to go through what I would concider none sense.. But I think Words is right (again) when he says it is unlikely that this debate will be solved.. after all similar clashes with Podlarians has shown that

 

[Logic]

Well, I didn't say otherwise. I did not mean functions are not easy to understand nor are they any less deep nor are they tools you pick up nor temporary nor did I mean they are not genetical. What is "easy to understand" is relative, likewise, what is "deep" is also relative.

First off I would like to say that you nitpicked quite a bit, lol.

You implied otherwise. The idea that one is able to use all eight cognitive functions shows that you don't really understand them. If you did then you'd realize that it makes no sense to even say that.

Do you see what I'm saying? Your entire approach is flawed because you interpret the definitions unlike how they are meant to be. Probably because you didn't pick up on all the details.

My response to yours was a guess as to how you "may be" thinking of the functions based on what I have seen before with others.

And I agree that it is "genetical"; that's why its named "temperament." What i meant by "reality" was backing your conclusions on valid premises as oppose to a "standard" or another debatable assumption from another theory such as MBTI or any other extension or interpretation of Cognitive Functions.

I cannot back anything I say with proof, If you want to enter into that area then you'll have to get involved with Pod'Lair. I can only help you make sense of this all based on my own understanding, and how it fits in with the facts. I can use examples to help get the ideas across, but I require that you grasp the general idea of how the different groups of cognitive functions work (Compass, Stimulus, Worldview, and Dynamic).

Either way, based on your initial explanation of why one cannot function via Fi + Ti(and no, I refuse to acknowledge that Se which is a Pe can, in any way, come through Si which is a Pi) , I think our argument here will fall upon a case of differentiating definitions of functions, which would make this discussion more difficult, lengthy and boring.

You misunderstand me. It isn't possible for the Se function to "come through" Si to become a Pi function. When you make sense of reality on a concrete level, you do so with the use of your Si function, this comes in the form of taking bits and pieces of literal information and holding onto them within your Si function.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It somehow hits me that there may be something wrong when you claim that all people have all 8 functions but they are only permitted to use 4 of them. Why is it that this theory of yours acknowledge that every person has all 8 functions, when you claim that only 4 of them will ever show ? What 'proof' do you have of the other 4? after all

Only 4 functions ever show. The others cannot show and do not show because they are never used.

Proof is based on how people behave and act. The entire body acts as an instrument that only plays one of the sixteen personality types "tune" if you will. Visible cues hint at certain cognitive functions being used. After the subject has been observed and enough data has been accumulated the expert will fit the person to a certain type.

I cannot explain in detail as to how this all works, but it is being done, I assure you. The understanding I am trying to explain to you fits these facts.

This logical conclusion is flawed.. you use the above as a reason 'why INTP can not use Fi'
you even say, what I am going to say, yourself so how you can conclude that they can not both work is beyond me. you claim: Ti = right vs wrong , Fi = good vs bad

Both Te and Ti = Right vs Wrong, however Ti is subjective and Te is objective.
Both Fe and Fi = Good vs Bad, however Fi is subjective and Te is objective.

Objective = Extroverted
Subjective = Introverted.

I recommend you read through this.

The model that Ti makes is based on subjective logic and the model that Fi makes is based on subjective values. Trying to operate both functions cannot work because Ti isn't Fi and vice versa.

now they both place a value on whatever they work with, but that does not make them contradictory..
Let's say I vote for socialist party. I can reason that with a socialist party in control, the goods and resourcess will be more equally divided and thus we have a smaller portion of the populace that will live in poverty
- That is a line of reasoning that can be labelled Ti (I btw believe every person can come up with such a reasoning!) However... It is not hard to detect that there are some personal values presented in the line of reasoning..for instance I believe that it is a good cause that we have a smaller amount of people living in poverty.. That is called Fi.. Now if you review my example then it should be clear that my primary focus lies with the Ti deduction and not with the Fi, but we can't deny that Fi playes a role in this little scenario. (INTP scenario)
It would appear this is your resons:

I've repeated myself, but you don't even try to see things from my perspective.

You seem to claim that Fe + Ti will be our replacement for Fi.. but there is a misunderstanding here, because that is not how Fe works. . Fe is as you can see is extraverted function. If you combine Fe + Ti , then you will with Ti see how your Fe works in situations, but you will not apply personal value with the Ti.. Fe will remain Fe and you can't just switch it to become an introverted function. If it is an introverted function it works as Fi

You misunderstand me.

Ti and Fe will never result in genuine Fi usage. Only Fe is our value based judgment, We all only use either Fi or Fe. No combination of functions can ever replace another function.

You seem to be highly underestimating what Fe does. To an INTP the use of Fe gets the job done in terms of value judgments. They never used Fi and they never needed to. They can get by with Fe and that is perfectly ethical as well.

It would seem you are not completly clear on what Fi/Fe is. . . If we take the above into concideration then you will never have a personal opinion which focuses on (good / bad) as an INTP if we are to follow your theory.. I myself will argue that there is something wrong there..

On the contrary, I am perfectly clear on how Fi and Fe function, However you aren't because you believe we all have use of all the functions.

Fi is a personal value based judgment where as Fe is the groups value based judgment.

To an INTP the "good vs bad" opinion comes from our Fe function.

Now to return to my example (I like the example as it shows an important thing) and it shows that both Fi and Ti are in use , but Ti is without a doubt the dominant function.. Fi is still there.
When you look at most INTP personality describtions they all seem to say that INTP's are easy going - I believe that the reason they are easy going is because they place very little personal value in things, except if it some principles that are extreemely dear to them, and if they are being violated the INTP has a habbit of taking an extreemly rigid stance - They have a minor use of Fi. . With a minor Fi they don't place value in most peoples actions and people therefore find them easy going. I have also heard/read somewhere that functions like an INTP's Fi can be trickered if they come under serious stress. That could imo, match what we see, when we see an INTP take an extreemely rigid stance when being violated on deep personal issues.

Your confusing the INTP's Fe function with what you believe is their "Fi function." Tsk tsk tsk.

The rigid stance that is taken by the INTP is because their Ti function disagrees, and since their Si/Fe function is underdeveloped (assuming the INTP in question has not developed them) the INTP resorts by becoming increasingly emotional and preoccupied with details. This type of behavior is pretty normal for INTP's under stress.

 

[baj]

Information taken in from the Stimulus Function has to be ordered by the Compass Function.

Ti will try to order the information based on a logical criteria. You can say that the Premise or flavor or language that Ti uses is itself. Ti puts ideas together which is fundamentally based on the idea that "things must make sense in a logical way". Ti sees "right vs wrong".

Fi on the other hand bases its ideas around a value based criteria. When Fi orders information around it is based on the idea that "things must harmonize together". Fi sees "good vs bad".

Since they both look at things from these two different ways, they conflict with one another. They "butt heads" so to speak because neither function agrees with how the other function decides how the data should be arranged to create its model.

This is silly! You can use both. It's like if I were to buy a computer, for example.

Ti is ranking and organizing criteria versus price. Ah, this one has more memory! But this one has a larger hard drive. This is a less know brand name, so it's cheaper.

Fluctuating between these data, Fi may be saying, "OH! I like the red one. It makes me feel warm and fuzzy!"

You can fluctuate back and forth between these different internal processes almost in the same moment, accumulating both criteria for a decision.

---

Now I want to speak about the P-dom! I'm a very strong P, and I have been in the past. That means I'm very comfortable not making a decision on many issues. I like unscheduled time. ETC. It means that I enjoy choosing between options or having a bunch of undecided options.

It's like you go to the ice cream shop. I enjoy having so many flavors. I feel great about it. That doesn't mean I can't decide on a flavor and enjoy eating it.

Yet, I can make a schedule if need to do so. I can order quickly at a restaurant, if I like.

My powers to decide are not impeded. I can use all the functions if I want.

But I prefer unscheduled time! (Perceiving) Hah! To complicate matters further, I organize myself and others at work so that things get done faster so that I can have more unscheduled leisure time.

I don't understand how one hinders the other. It's what you feel best or "prefer". I prefer to wait until April to do my taxes. I'm still going to do them.

 

[ElvenVeil]

For the sake of being fair, then I will say that you are correct.. I am not being completly objective as I regard what you are saying as wrong.. that is not an healthy attitude if I am to examine what you are saying to its full extend.
As you are logically concistent in your claims, I will read through Adymus post tomorrow
( 4 am atm hehe =p )
If I discover that it is not that stupid after all , then I will most likely pm you or similar.
(that was awfully diplomatic of me ??)
I just realized that this has strayed a bit away from the OP, which in itself naturally is a mistake

 

[Logic]

This is silly! You can use both. It's like if I were to buy a computer, for example.

Ti is ranking and organizing criteria versus price. Ah, this one has more memory! But this one has a larger hard drive. This is a less know brand name, so it's cheaper.

Do you notice that the criteria is actually externally defined? Versus price? Ranking? Looks like Te.

Fluctuating between these data, Fi may be saying, "OH! I like the red one. It makes me feel warm and fuzzy!"

Just an observation.

Feeling functions make decisions very quickly. Unlike thinking functions which require more time to weigh everything.

You can fluctuate back and forth between these different internal processes almost in the same moment, accumulating both criteria for a decision.

Your modulating between your Fi/Ne and Si/Te functions.

For the sake of being fair, then I will say that you are correct.. I am not being completly objective as I regard what you are saying as wrong.. that is not an healthy attitude if I am to examine what you are saying to its full extend.
As you are logically concistent in your claims, I will read through Adymus post tomorrow
( 4 am atm hehe =p )
If I discover that it is not that stupid after all , then I will most likely pm you or similar.
(that was awfully diplomatic of me ??)
I just realized that this has strayed a bit away from the OP, which in itself naturally is a mistake

I recommend you also read through Adymus's other posts throughout the entire forum as well. You'll start to realize why he is so .

 

[Words]

First off I would like to say that you nitpicked quite a bit, lol.

I was expressing a point and you seem to have missed it.

You implied otherwise. The idea that one is able to use all eight cognitive functions shows that you don't really understand them. If you did then you'd realize that it makes no sense to even say that.

Do you see what I'm saying? Your entire approach is flawed because you interpret the definitions unlike how they are meant to be. Probably because you didn't pick up on all the details.

You're basically saying, "You are wrong because I am right."

I might as well say the same lines to you: "Logic, You are wrong because clearly you have false understanding."

My point is...these statements hold no place in argumentation. They present nothing to the listener. In my perspective, you are simply claiming things without reason (which is quite irritating for me to be honest) and you just come off as "appealing to authority" (lol Adymus).

Read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ipse-dixitism
for further elaboration.

I cannot back anything I say with proof, If you want to enter into that area then you'll have to get involved with Pod'Lair.

Riiight. Because Pod'Lair is Pod'Lair.

I can only help you make sense of this all based on my own understanding, and how it fits in with the facts. I can use examples to help get the ideas across, but I require that you grasp the general idea of how the different groups of cognitive functions work (Compass, Stimulus, Worldview, and Dynamic).

Riight, here we go again. By "premises", I meant:

Justify this statement: "...how it fits in with the facts."

Because as I see it, it doesn't.

You misunderstand me. It isn't possible for the Se function to "come through" Si to become a Pi function. When you make sense of reality on a concrete level, you do so with the use of your Si function, this comes in the form of taking bits and pieces of literal information and holding onto them within your Si function.

Maan, I was not talking about "making sense of reality on a concrete level." I was talking about "Se." They are different. How do I perceive externally oriented concrete information without Se? Where is my in-the-moment sensation?

 

[Logic]

I was expressing a point and you seem to have missed it.

Don't worry, I got the message.

You're basically saying, "You are wrong because I am right."

I might as well say the same lines to you: "Logic, You are wrong because clearly you have false understanding."

My point is...these statements hold no place in argumentation. They present nothing to the listener. In my perspective, you are simply claiming things without reason (which is quite irritating for me to be honest) and you just come off as "appealing to authority" (lol Adymus).

Read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ipse-dixitism
for further elaboration.

Alright Words, I'll be more kind towards you, because I feel as though I've been somewhat critical of you. Still friends? lol

I respect Adymus because his logic makes sense to me, not because I am trying to appeal to his authority lol. You make me sound so un-INTP-ish.
------------------------------------------------
Alright, So why are we able to use only 4 functions compared to all 8 you ask. You remember when I said that Ti and Fi conflict with one another? They do so because one is logic based and the other is value based. Since they are both focused internally they both require the individual to pick one against the other (We however never actually pick ourselves though).

If you were to imagine the Ti and Fi function for a moment. Ti is taking information and applying a blue sticker to it. By doing so it is coming up with a way in which all the information will come together. Fi however is taking the same information and applying a red sticker to it. However it doesn't arrange the information the same way Ti does. Instead it arranges it in a completely different way. They both essentially make sense of the information and evaluate it in fundamentally different ways.

Imagine now, If we could have use of both functions. What do you suppose would happen? They would both hold hands and work together as a team? Sorry, but these two functions cannot stand even being in the same room together, let alone work as a team.

Ti will want to apply its blue sticker, but Fi will remove it and apply its own. Ti will then remove Fi's red sticker and re-apply its own again thus creating a vicious cycle. They conflict with one another in such a harsh way which prevents the individual from making any internal judgments whatsoever. Nothing ever gets done during this process which results in neither model ever getting created (not even being able to start!). So Ti and Fi both need for the other one to be unconscious indefinitely, So it can do its thing without being bothered.

You may ask, why does this happen? The reason is because information and how we evaluate it, has to be separated and understood in two parts for the mind to manage it properly and be of use. You can think of the two different parts as "positive" vs "negative." If we had use of all our functions we would clash at every single level, preventing our mind from doing anything.

Naturally, we were selected to be the way we are because it's the best way (as of right now anyway).

Maan, I was not talking about "making sense of reality on a concrete level." I was talking about "Se." They are different. How do I perceive externally oriented concrete information without Se? Where is my in-the-moment sensation?

OK, let me make it very clear. You do not have use of the Se function. You won't be able to perceive external realities in its form. This may seem redundant to you, but allow me to explain why I repeat myself.

When you say " How do I perceive externally oriented concrete information without Se?" It sounds like your asking, "How do I use Se without Se?"
You don't.

externally oriented = Extroverted
concrete information = Sensing

When you word things in this way, you make it difficult for me. So I must ask that you prune your questions more carefully.

You use a combination of Ne and Si to observe reality imaginatively and then as your doing this, your Si function is also at work by pinning down certain literal facts within its worldview. (You modulate)

You also seem concerned about "living in the moment". None of the right brain functions are based in time, so whenever you use your pair, (Ti/Ne) your living in the moment so to speak. You can't live in the moment with the Se function because, like I said, You don't have it. (Would you like for me to explain why that is? Hint: It has to do with the same idea behind why someone can only use Ti or Fi, but not both)

If that still doesn't satisfy you Words, then feel free to ask more. Personally, It seems like your confused about how to go about asking your question(s). So take your time in figuring that out. I have lots of time lol.

Btw, check out these links>>> here and here, they may help in making you understand the perceiving functions better.

 

[cheese]

brain hurty

 

[Words]

I respect Adymus because his logic makes sense to me, not because I am trying to appeal to his authority lol. You make me sound so un-INTP-ish.
------------------------------------------------

Appealing to authority is a common fault for everyone, so I wouldn't call it "un-INTPsh." But I did not state that you did appeal to authority. I mean simply that you may likely be...due to well...the degree of "mentioning" and the fallacy being well partnered with "Bare Assertion."

Since they are both focused internally they both require the individual to pick one against the other (We however never actually pick ourselves though).

Why does both function being introverted necessarily mean contradiction?

If you were to imagine the Ti and Fi function for a moment. Ti is taking information and applying a blue sticker to it. By doing so it is coming up with a way in which all the information will come together. Fi however is taking the same information and applying a red sticker to it. However it doesn't arrange the information the same way Ti does. Instead it arranges it in a completely different way. They both essentially make sense of the information and evaluate it in fundamentally different ways. Imagine now, If we could have use of both functions. What do you suppose would happen? They would both hold hands and work together as a team? Sorry, but these two functions cannot stand even being in the same room together, let alone work as a team....

...because...? Can you not organize one type of information with Fi and another with Ti? As I see it, Fi arranges values while Ti arranges logic. They manage different items, do they not?

Ti will want to apply its blue sticker, but Fi will remove it and apply its own. Ti will then remove Fi's red sticker and re-apply its own again thus creating a vicious cycle. They conflict with one another in such a harsh way which prevents the individual from making any internal judgments whatsoever. Nothing ever gets done during this process which results in neither model ever getting created (not even being able to start!). So Ti and Fi both need for the other one to be unconscious indefinitely, So it can do its thing without being bothered

.
Read Question Above.

Though, what do you mean by "unconscious"? And, regardless of initial assumptions, why indefinitely? Why not at intervals?

You may ask, why does this happen? The reason is because information and how we evaluate it, has to be separated and understood in two parts for the mind to manage it properly and be of use.

How did you reach this conclusion?

OK, let me make it very clear. You do not have use of the Se function. You won't be able to perceive external realities in its form. This may seem redundant to you, but allow me to explain why I repeat myself.

When you say " How do I perceive externally oriented concrete information without Se?" It sounds like your asking, "How do I use Se without Se?"

Yes, I am, but what I wanted to emphasize was how Se or "perception in terms of extroverted non-abstraction" can be easily reflected in reality. The wind I am sensing now, the screen I am looking at now, the continuous beat of my pulse that I'm feeling, the annoying sound that I am currently hearing. I cannot get this from Si nor Ne.

 

[baj]

Don't worry, I got the message.


------------------------------------------------
Alright, So why are we able to use only 4 functions compared to all 8 you ask. You remember when I said that Ti and Fi conflict with one another? They do so because one is logic based and the other is value based. Since they are both focused internally they both require the individual to pick one against the other (We however never actually pick ourselves though).

If you were to imagine the Ti and Fi function for a moment. Ti is taking information and applying a blue sticker to it. By doing so it is coming up with a way in which all the information will come together. Fi however is taking the same information and applying a red sticker to it. However it doesn't arrange the information the same way Ti does. Instead it arranges it in a completely different way. They both essentially make sense of the information and evaluate it in fundamentally different ways.

Imagine now, If we could have use of both functions. What do you suppose would happen? They would both hold hands and work together as a team? Sorry, but these two functions cannot stand even being in the same room together, let alone work as a team.

Ti will want to apply its blue sticker, but Fi will remove it and apply its own. Ti will then remove Fi's red sticker and re-apply its own again thus creating a vicious cycle. They conflict with one another in such a harsh way which prevents the individual from making any internal judgments whatsoever. Nothing ever gets done during this process which results in neither model ever getting created (not even being able to start!). So Ti and Fi both need for the other one to be unconscious indefinitely, So it can do its thing without being bothered.

Nonsense! You could be doing a math problem or thinking about something. At the same time you are aware of your feelings. People doing logical analysis can have a feeling.

At least in my experience.

The person in judgment makes an impersonal decision condemning a friend, but he could have FEELINGS about it because the person is also a friend.

You sound "inhuman".

Edit: Also, my preference from red may come from deeply held beliefs about feng shui, and not from what ever process you thought. You can not really judge what process I'm using.

Actually, personally, I may not prefer red. It's just an example. I may carefully analyze components to determine what was is the best value.

---

The one I like to use to explain is sifting clovers. When I was about seven, I used to sift clovers to find four leaf clovers.

The inspirational vision for this was that my mother would press them in book and be very happy.

However, at the same time, I'd be contemplating what is the best was to find clovers:
dividing into grids? If so, what pattern of grid?
grabbing clumps and picking through them?
changing the angle of view?

For me this is internal thought and internal feeling, working together.

 

[gruesomebrat]

'E/I NTP=======ENTP, INTP== NeTiFeSi, TiNeSiFe
E/I TxNySxFy===ENTJ, INTP===TeNiSeFi TiNeSiFe'

let's see.. the first bit you enter the standard MBTI version. That one makes good sense to me.

Now you are working with 'X'es' in the second bit .. that naturally results in a huge difference when it comes to the 4 letter code.. That is also why I personally denies x as an actual option. . and rather look at the system like this - the person is introvert, but not very much so . . he is therefore still an TiNeSiFe .. it is not impossible that he is using his Ne more than the avarage INTP. -

So if I review what you might be saying then you are saying that the letter combination has it's flaws when it comes to the 'x' -- and that is correct

I obviously saw this as incredibly different than ElvenVeil. ESC, correct me if I'm wrong, but it seemed to me that in the second 'equation', you were using math terminology to denote that this would work for either TiNeSiFe, or TeNiSeFi. x and y, to me at least, almost always symbolize unknown variables, and it seemed to fit with the other side of the equation. Perhaps this is just due to my natural bias as someone who is mathematically-oriented instead of artitically-oriented, though?

 

[ElvenVeil]

yes I think that is what is being said

E/I TxNySxFy===ENTJ, INTP===TeNiSeFi TiNeSiFe

It would appear that we are regarding this the same way

(1)E/I TxNySxFy===(2)ENTJ, INTP===(3)TeNiSeFi TiNeSiFe

(1) can result in either of the two in (2) . (2) = (3)

in other words XNTP = TeNiSeFi OR TiNeSiFe = > false , as we are are dealing with a human being and they must be either TeNiSeFi or TiNeSiFe

As it is False, then a person can not be XNTP
That is why ESC says that it makes more sense to look at the cognetive functions and not the 4 letter combination (XNTP) , and I agree with that.

This is at least how I read it, and it seems to be me you are reading it the same way ?

 

[Logic]

Why does both function being introverted necessarily mean contradiction?

...because...? Can you not organize one type of information with Fi and another with Ti? As I see it, Fi arranges values while Ti arranges logic. They manage different items, do they not?

They can't separate the information into two piles because they manage the same information all the time and at the same time.

The exact moment information comes to the Ti function is the same moment it comes to the Fi function. Both then try to take it and make use of it, but both end up grabbing it at the exact same time and neither is able to pull it away from the other because they are both evenly matched.

Information doesn't come labeled as "Made for Ti" and "Made for Fi." That makes it sound as though the information has already been judged by either function before it has actually been judged by them. When information comes to us it is always raw and unprocessed.

Fi arranges information through its subjective values where as Ti arranges it through its subjective logic.

Though, what do you mean by "unconscious"? And, regardless of initial assumptions, why indefinitely? Why not at intervals?

All I mean by unconscious is that it cannot be active to make any evaluations.

The other Compass function has to be indefinitely unconscious. If both functions worked in intervals then both functions would try to fight to always make its own mind up about how things should be when they are being used. When Fi is active it will tear down Ti's model and re-build it as the Fi model, Likewise when Ti becomes active and Fi becomes unconscious, it will tear down the Fi model and re-create its Ti model. Nothing gets accomplished.

The key thing to understand here is that they both want to do the same thing, Introverted Judgment.

How did you reach this conclusion?

Just to be clear here, what I was trying to really say was that we can only use one pairing of judging functions (Fi+Te or Ti+Fe) and one pairing of perceiving functions (Ne+Si or Ni+Se) otherwise we would be met with an "overload problem." This is exactly what I am trying to get you to wrap your head around by going in depth describing why we can only use Ti or Fi (though this is only a start).

So, how did I reach this conclusion?

Through the process of trying to understand the cognitive functions. Which is exactly what you're trying to do.

Yes, I am, but what I wanted to emphasize was how Se or "perception in terms of extroverted non-abstraction" can be easily reflected in reality. The wind I am sensing now, the screen I am looking at now, the continuous beat of my pulse that I'm feeling, the annoying sound that I am currently hearing. I cannot get this from Si nor Ne.

What do you think I was talking about here?

To simply say:

"I can see and feel therefore I am using the Se function."
"I can come up with many different ideas, that means I am using the Ne function."
or even:
"I organized this data therefore I used the Ti function."
Is completely wrong.

Your confusing what the Se function is with your ability to use your senses. Everyone can see-touch-smell-taste-hear (no nitpicking please). However doing so doesn't mean your using Se.

To put it simply, Se is the focus or strong inclination towards wanting to orient to external reality in a concrete way. This is especially strong for ESXP types. INTP's, however do not have this.

 

[baj]

N
To put it simply, Se is the focus or strong inclination towards wanting to orient to reality in a concrete way. This is especially strong for ESXP types. INTP's do not have this.

Maybe I'm confused about functions, but you didn't really answer the second round of examples I gave.

For this item quoted above, I could say that naturally I'm not too inclined to be focused on the external. For example, I failed the driving portion of my driver's test four times. I drove right through stop signs (at full speed) etc. I got my driver's license on the fifth try however.

I could say that now, I'm reasonably decent driver. Most of the time I actually stop for traffic lights or stop signs. If you are not good at observing the external "oriented to reality in a concrete way", then how can you learn to drive better and have less accidents, traffic violations?

 

[baj]

Okay, I did a little bit of reading on the functions. See if this sounds right:

Ti
---

In this I'm constantly thinking of how to improve fish. I'm think of genetics (selective breeding), patterns, databases of production. I want better morphology ratios, better color and patterns.

Fi
----
That customer likes that color. I should get him some. That will make him happy. Am I happy? Gosh, I like fish, but these long hours. Does the good outweigh the bad?

---
Neither of these functions are in competition. They are separate models living together in harmony working on different issues (usually). At least they are with me.

 

[Words]

No, because most the information must be either modeled through the Ti or Fi function. The reason I say most is because the Extroverted Judgment functions come into play as well here (Fe for Ti, and Te for Fi). They are dimmed in usage, but they're still being used somewhat.

Just because there are Je functions doesn't mean that a Ji function should not be functional. They look at different things, Je is for the external while Ji is for the internal. One can judge an item via an internal logic and one can judge another item via an external logic.

As much as an INTP would like to Ti, he/she cannot "function" efficiently without resorting to "external logic." Examples of this can be seen in situations that allows no time for reflection (such as in micro-military) and situations wherein the authority is evidently superior such as parent-child scenarios.

All I mean by unconscious is that it cannot be active to make any evaluations.

If it is not active, then what's the point of it being named as "unconscious?" What is the point of its existence as an unconscious function?

both functions would try to fight to always make its own mind up about how things should be when they are being used. When Fi is active it will tear down Ti's model and re-build it as the Fi model, Likewise when Ti becomes active and Fi becomes unconscious, it will tear down the Fi model and re-create its Ti model. Nothing gets accomplished.

Right. We're still working on the validity of this conclusion above.

The key thing to understand here is that they both want to do the same thing, Introverted Judgment.

because both are Ji? Well both Ji and Je are "J"'s. Similarity doesn't mean exclusivity.

Just to be clear here, what I was saying was that we can only use Fi+Te or Ti+Fe and Ne+Si or Ni+Se because the mind can only handle a single pairing of judging and perceiving functions. If we could use all we wouldn't function at all.

How did I come to realize this?

Through the process of trying to understand the cognitive functions. Which is exactly what you're trying to do.

Appeal to authority. Because you claim to understand something, the "mind" can only handle a limited amount of functions.

What do you think I was talking about here?


Your confusing what the Se function is with your ability to use your senses. Everyone can see-touch-smell-taste-hear (no nitpicking please). However doing so doesn't mean your using Se.

To put it simply, Se is the focus or strong inclination towards wanting to orient to reality in a concrete way. This is especially strong for ESXP types. INTP's do not have this.

Ok. So Se is not a "function" anymore; it's a *strong inclination*? So we're simply going to forget that whole idea of "hierarchy of functions"?

Having Se doesn't mean having a strong inclination towards...well..to simplify..."Se." INxJ's don't like Se. Se is a "function"---a specific process, action or task that a system is able to perform.

 

[BigApplePi]

Okay, I did a little bit of reading on the functions. See if this sounds right:

Ti
---

In this I'm constantly thinking of how to improve fish. I'm think of genetics (selective breeding), patterns, databases of production. I want better morphology ratios, better color and patterns.

Fi
----
That customer likes that color. I should get him some. That will make him happy. Am I happy? Gosh, I like fish, but these long hours. Does the good outweigh the bad?

---
Neither of these functions are in competition. They are separate models living together in harmony working on different issues (usually). At least they are with me.

Not sure that is Fi. That could be Si and Fe and Ti.

Nice kohaku(?) you've got there.

 

[baj]

Not sure that is Fi. That could be Si and Fe and Ti.

Nice kohaku(?) you've got there.

Thanks.

I tried to read some definitions of the functions, but I'm still not clear on what they are.

However, I think I use both all the introverted functions. I also used Te at work to organize and plan a bunch of stuff. I'm not really clear on when each transitions between being an "introverted" function and an extroverted one.

Before I knew what the MBTI was I tested:

I 100%
N 87%
T 55%
P 87%

Thus I think it is a spectrum. People are describing classical, stereotypical types in this thread, and I just think that people are way, way more complicated than that. I have lots of F and T characteristics, but right now I think I'm on the F side.

I do love the theory, despite its flaws.

Fi is visceral presence of feeling throughout, whereas Ti is more like a fascination in the mind. I use both. In my reality, emotion is there and mind is also there. Maybe that is because I'm closer to the center.

Yet, it's not like both build a great model and the other tears it down. I don't feel that.

I guess considering the same issue, they can both come into play. The "Ti" wonders things like whether I could find a job in this economy, and whether I could find on that pays well. Thinking considers whether the job is in line with the logical progression of my career goals.

Fi, well, hell. It stays because of love of approval and appreciation I get from the personal relationships with fellow employees. Also, I have a secret value system that makes the beauty of the world a life mission.

However, Fi can also just say "to heck with logic", and quit one day without notice because the emotional climate became too severe... In that case it doesn't matter if the bridge is blown, or if it makes any sense at all.

Some days I stay just because of my dog. The farm is an excellent place for a dog to do doggy things like hunt and run around. So is my "compassion" for my dog in regard to her habits Fi or Ti? Or the combination? Or something else?

 

[EyeSeeCold]

Spoiler

hmm.. I don't see how your two options, in the question, are not both possible
your question is a little confusing as you make it sound like I am not saying that E/I determines focus direction. What I said in the previous post was that E/I determines if your primary function is either introvert or extravert.. that must if anything mean that E/I determines the direction of function energy .. so to that bit; yes.

being introverted naturally also says something about you in itself - you store up new energy by being alone and not by being with others.

'So the Four letter code determines type and not functions determine type'

in short, yes the four letter code determines type.. but you seem to be looking at this some sort of upside down way ?
We have a system that is based on observation of functions. that observation results in 4 letter code = MBTI type
in other words TiNeSiFe = INTP .. so there is no disconection between my two options as they are equal one another.

iirc MBTI works on 80% (this may naturally vary of how you regard the MBTI system) of the population so there is naturally a diversity in how this works. I myself argue that functions in the same types can be used more or less frequent/ and on different levels (for instance using Ti a little less and Si a little more). So naturally the more correct you wish to be about your own functions the more precise you will become. But that , imo , does not change that Ti/Ne/Si/Fe = INTP , works the majority of the time .

'E/I NTP=======ENTP, INTP== NeTiFeSi, TiNeSiFe
E/I TxNySxFy===ENTJ, INTP===TeNiSeFi TiNeSiFe'

let's see.. the first bit you enter the standard MBTI version. That one makes good sense to me.

Now you are working with 'X'es' in the second bit .. that naturally results in a huge difference when it comes to the 4 letter code.. That is also why I personally denies x as an actual option. . and rather look at the system like this - the person is introvert, but not very much so . . he is therefore still an TiNeSiFe .. it is not impossible that he is using his Ne more than the avarage INTP. -

So if I review what you might be saying then you are saying that the letter combination has it's flaws when it comes to the 'x' -- and that is correct

Spoiler

yes I think that is what is being said

E/I TxNySxFy===ENTJ, INTP===TeNiSeFi TiNeSiFe

It would appear that we are regarding this the same way

(1)E/I TxNySxFy===(2)ENTJ, INTP===(3)TeNiSeFi TiNeSiFe

(1) can result in either of the two in (2) . (2) = (3)

in other words XNTP = TeNiSeFi OR TiNeSiFe = > false , as we are are dealing with a human being and they must be either TeNiSeFi or TiNeSiFe

As it is False, then a person can not be XNTP
That is why ESC says that it makes more sense to look at the cognetive functions and not the 4 letter combination (XNTP) , and I agree with that.

This is at least how I read it, and it seems to be me you are reading it the same way ?

Spoiler

I obviously saw this as incredibly different than ElvenVeil. ESC, correct me if I'm wrong, but it seemed to me that in the second 'equation', you were using math terminology to denote that this would work for either TiNeSiFe, or TeNiSeFi. x and y, to me at least, almost always symbolize unknown variables, and it seemed to fit with the other side of the equation. Perhaps this is just due to my natural bias as someone who is mathematically-oriented instead of artitically-oriented, though?

My main point was that the E/I dichotomy in terms of the Four Letter Code does not exist in real life and should not be used in theory. It is an inconsistent flaw in the MBTI system.

If someone is really E or I, their functions are already determined, all we need to know is if those functions are "XiYe" or "XeYi". ENTP should not be the extraverted type of INTP in terms of E/I, ENTJ and INTP should be the E/I flips.

E/I NTP=======ENTP, INTP== NeTiFeSi, TiNeSiFe
E/I TxNySxFy===ENTJ, INTP===TeNiSeFi TiNeSiFe

E/I NTP implies a position shift of two functions. How is E/I dependent on the position of two functions? Isn't E/I dependent on the direction of the first function?

E/I NTP should really refer to NxTyFxSy or INTJ, ENTP.

Therefore E/I NTP is invalidated if it produces INTJ. The Four Letter Code system should be fixed in terms of what functions it refers to.

 

[Logic]

In order for a human psyche to be able to function at all at the most basic level, they must address the four considerations:

Perception - They must have a way to take in information

Discernment (Or Judgment as MBTI calls it) - A way to make decisions (make sense of information)

Objectivity - A way to address the Outer world

Subjectivity - A way to address the Inner world

You can address these four considerations with just one side of the Psyche, for instance Ti will address Subjectivity and Discernment, and Ne will address Objectivity and Perception.
Now we go a little deeper into advanced functionality:

Humans also need to address the Four Priorities of the Psyche.

Compass Bearings (Subjective Discernment) - They need a way to make decisions based on personal and subjective criteria. Fi and Ti address this Priority.

Stimulus Register (Objective Perception) - They need a way to take in information as it's occurring in the present and Outer/Objective world. Ne and Se address this Priority.

Worldview Map (Subjective Perception) - They need a way to take in information that's personal, subjective, structured and time based (Beginning-middle-end). Ni and Si address this Priority.

Dynamics Mover (Objective Discernment) - They need a way to be able to make executive/Action-taking decisions as well as sense of the dynamics that are occurring in the outer world, how things should be done, and what it means when certain events occur. Fe and Te address this Priority.

Lastly there is the question of what kind of information we're taking in, and what the criteria is for these decisions to be based on. For that, there are 4 channels that all functions communicate through that all humans must also address in some way, two discernment channels and two perception channels.

Interpretive Perception - All humans need a way to receive pattern-based information. Ne and Ni are Interpretive Perceptions

Literal Perception - All humans need a way to receive Concrete and detail based information. Se and Si are Literal Perceptions. Note: Despite the Jungian naming conventions, Se and Si actually have nothing to do with the senses, they take in literal information, not sensual information. Sensual information is received by both Stimulus Registers including Ne when a person doesn't have Se as a conscious function.

Logic-Based Discernment - All humans need A way to make Decisions based on Logic and/or systemic consistency.

Values-Based Discernment - All humans need A way to make Decisions based on Values.

A person cannot function if they don't have all four 4 considerations addressed on both sides of the psyche, all four Priorities address, and all 4 Perception and Discernment channels addressed. Furthermore, in order to function a person ONLY needs these 12 elements addressed at the conscious level, no more and no less is necessary.

Let's use an Example: Ti-Ne-Si-Fe

Ti: Addresses the Considerations of Subjectivity and Discernment. Addresses the Priority of Compass Bearings. Provides a way to Make Logic-Based Decisions.

Ne: Addresses the Considerations of Objectivity and Perception. Addresses the Priority of Stimulus Register. Provides a way to receive Interpretive Information.

Si: Addresses the Considerations of Subjectivity and Perception. Addresses the Priority of Worldview Map. Provides a way to receive Literal Information.

Fe: Addresses the Considerations of Objectivity and Discernment Addresses the Priority of Dynamics Mover. Provides a way to make Values-Based Decisions.

Did you see that? All Considerations, All Priorities, and All channels were addressed with just these four Functions, anything more would be unnecessary. This also tells us one more thing, The cognitive functions MUST be ordered in ways that are conducive to the prerequisite Considerations, Priorities, and Channels that humans need to function. This is why you will not see a creature with Te-Ne-Si-Ni; They are not addressing the Four considerations on both sides of the Psyche, and they're missing a Compass Bearings, which is why this creature does not and could not exist.

When you expect that Cognitive configurations (Personality types) exist, then you also expect that there must be a certain logic and structure to the way humans are designed. People on forums like to believe "I use all eight functions in random order and whenever I want, YAAAAAAYY!!" but if you're going to believe that these 16 configurations exist in the first place, then it must stand to reason that there is a certain mathematic to how they're configured that cannot be contradicted. If it didn't work like this, there would be no 16-types, it'd all just be chaos.

The next element of human design that's relevant to this topic is the fact that humans come Off-balanced, this is another design that was done purposely and cannot be any other way. All functions don't have an equal presence and purpose in the Psyche, there is a hierarchy to them. It's a misconception among Jungians or MBTIers alike that having Off-Balanced functionality is a flaw, it's actually great. The Leader-Subordinate relationship among the hierarchy of functions is actually a way more efficient design than supreme equality. Also, being completely balanced would defeat the purpose of having Cognitive Configurations in the first place. So this design is what equips us with Four Conscious Functions consisting of two Momentum and two Modulation functions, and Four Unconscious Functions.

Momentum - These are your top two functions in your configuration. You can think of the Momentum functions as the gifts that keep on giving. They're fast and easy for a person to use, and when used they give a person energy and stimulation. They have an innate drive to keep doing more work. There's a Near-side and close feeling to these functions, as they tend to be the most conscious. You could say that it's these two functions that really create the essence of the Cognitive configuration, an INTP just wouldn't be an INTP if it wasn't for their Ti-Ne Momentum.

Modulation - These are the Bottom two functions. The Modulation functions have the ability to "rein in" your momentum functions and cause them to do less work. They use more energy and feel taxing as a result, and wont be used as freely and easily as the Momentum functions. There's a Far-side of the conscious and "reaching across" feeling that comes with the use of Modulation functions, as they tend to be less conscious (more in the background if you will), although they're still conscious functions.

Unconscious Four - the remaining four functions cannot be used by a person, certainly not in the same way that you'll see a type that has said function in their top four will use them. So it's actually most accurate to say that we don't have conscious control over the unconscious four functions like we have of the conscious four. However, that doesn't mean they're completely absent. The Unconscious Four functions exist as concepts in the unconscious mind. Humans were designed to play with other humans, so the concepts of all Functions and Archetypes come prewired. You might not use Te as a Conscious function, but your Ti comes with an unconscious understanding that there's an over all Te to the universe, that everything is a part of one big cosmic system that can be understood. Because of this, you could say that it's these unconscious functions that your Conscious functions call out to.

Okay, I'm not just lecturing for the sake of hearing myself type, I did all of that to set the stage. If everyone else in the conversation wasn't quite up to speed about how the Cognitive Configurations are designed, we should be more or less on the same page now. So now we can start getting into the Nitty Gritty of this discussion.

Why can't an INTP use Fi?

The technical answer is because the INTP doesn't have Conscious access to Fi, what's an even more important question to ask is; Why should they use Fi? The reasoning that seems to be going around is that Personal Values = Fi. While it's true that Fi can be thought of as personal values, it's not true that all personal values = Fi. If an INTP needs to make a decision based on Personal and Subjective reasoning, they'll use Ti, and if they need to make a decision based on Values they''ll use Fe. The truth is, nobody uses functions in isolation, so they would be using an interplay of Ti and Fe anyway. This interplay of decision making processes will produce a result, and that result might even be the same result as a person that used Fi and Te to make that decision, but that doesn't mean they used the same tools.

You should not think of the cognitive functions as their results, like Te = Planning and Organizing, or Fi = Personal values. That's MBTI rubbish. All humans are designed to handle almost anything with their top four functions. So when we say an INTP doesn't have conscious access to Fi, that doesn't mean they cannot have personal values. It just means the INTP doesn't have access to the Fi hardware that performs a specific task in the psyche. Personal values is simply a result, a result that can be easily accomplished with the Integrity and Code of Conduct that Fe gives a person. Fe is an Objective and values-based decision making function, and very much like Te, Fe will tell you the right way you're supposed to do something. However, it's values-based so Fe will tell you how a good and heroic person is supposed to conduct themselves. This is the exact same values-based language that Fi is speaking, in the same way that Ti and Te both speak the language of Logic. Fe is objective in the sense that it relates to the way human relationships and dynamics play out in an external communal fashion, but that doesn't mean that these values are not personal, per se. Don't forget, Fe is linked to one of the Worldview Map functions, Si or Ni, so the dynamics of how human relationships work is tied to a person's subjective and personal worldview. This is why Values can still differ from Fe user to Fe user, culture to culture.

Nonsense! You could be doing a math problem or thinking about something. At the same time you are aware of your feelings. People doing logical analysis can have a feeling.

Buh? At no point did I say a person can only make Logic-Based or Values-Based decisions, (one or the other). You guys are confusing Feelings in general with Fi, which is a specific function that has a bigger purpose in the psyche than simply being feelings in general. The reality of Cognitive functions is that they're not as isolated as the people in this thread think they are. For example, I don't just have Ti, I have Ti/Fe, it's all one thing, the two processes are fused together and need each other to work. If you have Ti/Fe like I do, then your Feelings are from Fe, not Fi.

The other problem is what I already covered, but I'm going to be a little redundant here because I really want to hammer this point in: The anecdotal result of functions does not indicate a specific function. So there is no reason to think this: "That customer likes that color. I should get him some. That will make him happy. Am I happy? Gosh, I like fish, but these long hours. Does the good outweigh the bad?" has to be Fi. Yeah sure, a values-based decision of some kind was made in that example, but it could've been Fe in the same way that it could've been Fi, they both relate to one's feelings.

Yes, I am, but what I wanted to emphasize was how Se or "perception in terms of extroverted non-abstraction" can be easily reflected in reality. The wind I am sensing now, the screen I am looking at now, the continuous beat of my pulse that I'm feeling, the annoying sound that I am currently hearing. I cannot get this from Si nor Ne.

Words, when things don't make sense, you should stop and ask yourself "Why is my logical paradigm detecting this as a paradox?" I can tell you that the reason this doesn't make sense to you is because you've submitted to a specific erroneous assumption: Se must be used to acquire sensual information.

Se is not exclusive to the five senses. The five senses are a function that occurs in all people regardless of what type they are, however different types will register the information differently. Se registers objectively and real-time occurring information in its literal and concrete form. The five senses is one of the sources that this information can come from, but Se is not the Senses themselves, it is simply the way you acquire what is coming from the senses. Information coming from the Five senses is acquired by Ne if you have Ne as one of your Conscious four functions. That's right, this is Ne coming into my eyes right now, it is Ne that I taste and feel. However, this sensory information is being registered not in its literal form, it is being registered as a pattern, and if I want to identify these patterns as specific things, I'll have to use Si. But thats just me Words, as to whether you are or are not experiencing Se right now depends on if you really are an INTP or not.

If it is not active, then what's the point of it being named as "unconscious?" What is the point of its existence as an unconscious function?

Because even though you don't have conscious control over it, other people do, all eight cognitive functions exist universally and in the collective consciousness of humanity as a whole. Human beings are pack animals, and we are designed to work together and feed off of each other, so these concepts of all human technology exist in all humans either consciously or unconsciously. When you have a hierarchy of 4 conscious functions, you are left with an empty space that these four functions call out to. The existence of Ti implies the existence of Te, and the existence of Ne implies the existence of Ni, and so on and so forth. Right now, I am referring to all of the functions as more than just human hardware, and I'm referring to them as the concepts that exist in humanity and in the universe. When Ti picks up on Principles, then it is looking for the system, Te. When Ne picks up on possibility, then it understands there are greater unknown truths to reality, Ni. We may not have conscious use of all of these functions, but we are designed to unconsciously reach for them in a way.

 

[baj]

@logic, Thanks for a thoughtful and well worded reply. You are worthy of great respect. Even if you are wrong.

Assuming you are not, how can you tell if Ti or Fi is active? This must be a reasonable subjective process (like a belief system) because there's no way to tell it from the outside.

Also, it sounds like you don't believe people are a spectrum between Fi or Ti. One is active (like flipping a switch) and the other is shut off. When does this occur? At birth? Strictly when the other process is used? It's like you describing people as AC or DC, and neither can have Fi and Ti existing together...there is not hybridization and adaptation between them. Is it like some kind of hard-wired genetic feature? Does this evolve through experience?

Also, you didn't address the question of when Fi becomes Fe and those kinds of transitions. If we are to use logic like an identification key...how do you identify one versus the other?

Sometimes I make decisions by the heart and sometimes by the head, and that's sort of a MBTI question. Thus, I could test F or T depending on how compassionate I feel that day. Thus, how do you determine where the dividing line is? How would I answer if I'm F or T? I'd probably say: "It depends." I may not even be able to answer it.

What I abhor is that you seem to be putting people into boxes that don't fit them; specifically me, because I believe that I use both Fi and Ti. Some have described me as a hybrid.

Sometimes I feel like I'm NF who idolized the Spock character such that the character became real. Other times I believe I'm a NT who adopted feeling models to the extent that they came to life. I'm not even sure which is true.

Thus, how can you be sure? Also, what about the spectrum thing?

 

[BigApplePi]

baj & Logic.

baj. I concur with you that Logic did a marvelous job in replying. I share your puzzlement, so I will rephase your question:

Logic: Assuming I have Ti, Ne, what is this "Fi" that I don't have it? Can you describe Fi? I believe you said you don't have it either. If I knew what Fi was, I could say, "I don't have that."