Fi vs. Ti as Convictions about Animate vs. Inanimate Objects
Nov 14, 2018 13:02:36 GMT -5 by supahprotist
Post by supahprotist on Nov 14, 2018 13:02:36 GMT -5
"Reactive judgment is oriented within, and its control
lies in personally held convictions; it is one’s ethical or logical
Compass." - CT Book
This quote along with my interpretation of the Ji Profile leads me to conclude that Ji generates "should" assessments. As a compass process, it points toward the ideal manifestation of an object. The best way I can think about it right now, is that Ji describes how things "should" be.
A personal example, "People in the typology community in general tend to spit out type assessments without giving explanations of how they arrived at their conclusions. What they "should" be doing is justifying their assertions with the thought process that led them to their conclusion." - Me
That being said...
"A more precise definition would be to say the
Heart, so to speak, is that which manages decisions that deal
with Humanity and living things: it is the principle of Ethic. The
Mind, so to speak, is that which manages decisions that pertain
to non-living things: it is the principle of Logic." - CT Book
So perhaps it would be accurate to view Ti as focused on how inanimate objects should be and Fi as focused on how animate objects should be; animate meaning living and inanimate meaning nonliving.
The way I might be seeing Fi vs. Ti now is as a contrast between people who see imperfections in animate objects vs. those who see imperfections in inanimate objects.
This throws a wrench in my current typing as TiSe, because I don't really concern myself with inanimate imperfections. I don't get concerned with website layouts or problems with "things", most of my complaints about the world revolve around behavioral issues or problems with "people".
lies in personally held convictions; it is one’s ethical or logical
Compass." - CT Book
This quote along with my interpretation of the Ji Profile leads me to conclude that Ji generates "should" assessments. As a compass process, it points toward the ideal manifestation of an object. The best way I can think about it right now, is that Ji describes how things "should" be.
A personal example, "People in the typology community in general tend to spit out type assessments without giving explanations of how they arrived at their conclusions. What they "should" be doing is justifying their assertions with the thought process that led them to their conclusion." - Me
That being said...
"A more precise definition would be to say the
Heart, so to speak, is that which manages decisions that deal
with Humanity and living things: it is the principle of Ethic. The
Mind, so to speak, is that which manages decisions that pertain
to non-living things: it is the principle of Logic." - CT Book
So perhaps it would be accurate to view Ti as focused on how inanimate objects should be and Fi as focused on how animate objects should be; animate meaning living and inanimate meaning nonliving.
The way I might be seeing Fi vs. Ti now is as a contrast between people who see imperfections in animate objects vs. those who see imperfections in inanimate objects.
This throws a wrench in my current typing as TiSe, because I don't really concern myself with inanimate imperfections. I don't get concerned with website layouts or problems with "things", most of my complaints about the world revolve around behavioral issues or problems with "people".