Extraverted Thinking (Te) vs Introverted Thinking (Ti)
Combined with the following asks:
Can you write about Te from an ENTJ’s perspective? I find most online descriptions of Te are poorly written by non Te users and insufficient/patronizing. I would love to hear the Te-dom point of view. Thank you, Mr. ENTJ
Can you compare Te and Ti? I looked but didn’t see anywhere on the blog yet. Thank yyou for your time :)
Difference between Te and Ti?
How is Te any different from Ti? As a Ti-user I feel that I use Te as well in the way use my logic to make decisions
ENTJ: Auxiliary Introverted Intuition (Ni)
It’s objective vs subjective logic. For comparison:
Te (ENTJ, ESTJ, INTJ, ISTJ) emphasizes truth. Truth is defined as that which is true or in accordance with fact or reality.
Ti (INTP, ISTP, ENTP, ESTP) emphasizes logic. Logic is defined as reasoning conducted or assessed according to strict principles of validity.
The reason why we call Te objective and Ti subjective is because Te is untouched by the individual– we use information provided to us as-is via the real world in forms like: facts, data sets, observations, research studies, news, rankings, academic journals, polls, subject matter experts, etc. Te logic is drawn from external sources to understand (”organize”) the outside world. “Organized” doesn’t mean that Te users are neat and tidy people– it means our minds sort information by relevance and impact. We first make sense of what is (current state), and from there, use that information to transform the world into what it can be (future state).
The main reason why these two cognitive functions (and their associated MBTI types) always clash is pretty simple: what exists in the real world (Te) is not always logical (Ti) and what’s logical in pure reasoning (Ti) does not always work in the real world (Te).
Let’s say you were to ask this question: “How does one become a management consultant at the best consulting firm in the world, McKinsey and Co.?”
Ti method (logical but false): “To successfully be accepted into the best consulting firm in the world, McKinsey and Co., I should first and foremost major in a relevant subject like business or economics, have exceptional grades in my classes, and develop strong skills in public speaking, problem solving, presentation, and preparation because that’s what management consultants need to succeed. If I do well in those areas, I should be a competitive candidate.”
Te method (illogical but true): “To successfully be accepted into the best consulting firm in the world, McKinsey and Co., I should first and foremost research which target schools they recruit from. The major I select and classes that I take have less relevance than the university I attend because without being in the right place, McKinsey won’t even consider me as a candidate. Next, I should excel in academics and network with alums and McKinsey professionals. If I do well in those areas, I should be a competitive candidate.”
The Ti method states a logical but false statement. It’s logical because to be a good management consultant, you certainly need to have all those skills (problem solving, quantitative analysis, presentation skills, etc.). The reason why it’s false is because it omits empirical evidence. The most important determinant in getting into McKinsey is actually the business school you graduate from– McKinsey doesn’t recruit outside of the top 10-15 MBA programs in the country, it’s extremely rare for them to do so. The Ti user is more likely not to know this.
The Te method states an illogical but true statement. It’s illogical because the university you attend shouldn’t have an impact on your job prospects: there are dumb kids at elite colleges and smart kids at lower ranked colleges. Even so, this is still a true statement because, again, McKinsey doesn’t recruit from universities outside the Top 10-15 MBA programs. Data suggests that school rankings have an impact on getting into McKinsey and other elite consulting firms (data references: McKinsey’s career website, LinkedIn, networking events, Poets and Quants, etc.). The Te user is more likely to know this.
Related: Mr. ENTJ, do things like rankings, reputation, and prestige for which school you attend matter when it comes to your career?
How do you change a Te user’s mind?
If you want the Te user to change their opinion, you must provide empirical evidence that overturns their logic.
If you tell a Te user you’re applying to Stanford University with a 2.0 GPA (C- average, 65-70%) and a 1000 SAT score (35 percentile) but the facts state Stanford’s average admitted GPA is over 4.0 (A+ average, 100%) and average SAT score is 1460+ (96 percentile) (reference: Stanford Admission Data) then Te will say you’re not a competitive candidate. It doesn’t matter if you’re a great student who’s actually really smart “but I’m just lazy/ I don’t do well on tests/my grades are bad.” It doesn’t matter if Stanford is the perfect fit for you and your tech entrepreneurship goals. It doesn’t matter if you think grading scales and test scores are illogical, insufficient, and inaccurate measures of intelligence. You can debate until your face is red, stomp your feet, cry, kick, and scream, but from a data perspective provided by Stanford University itself– the facts strongly suggest you aren’t getting accepted.
That’s not Te being mean or inflexible– that’s simply the facts – and we can’t do anything about the facts because they are what they are. They are objective. What is flexible to the Te user is how to solve the problem. Nothing will change the fact that you’re a poor candidate for Stanford but if the goal is to get accepted, the Te solution is to raise your grades and test scores to match the benchmark set by Stanford’s admission data. The solution is not to debate endlessly the merits of grades and test scores or Stanford’s admission criteria.
I’d love for you to get into the university of your dreams, Stanford is a phenomenal school, but if the data clashes violently with the decision then I can’t side with you. If the data doesn’t support the decision, the Te user won’t budge.
How can Te and Ti work better together?
Te gets frustrated with Ti’s focus on irrelevant details, inability to interpret generalizations, and frivolous nitpicking. Working with Ti can be irritating for a Te user because Ti can get “stuck” on something that doesn’t personally make sense to them, but that makes sense to everyone else, that works anyway, and that achieves the end result. Where the Te user wants to move on, the Ti user wants to stay and dig and dig and dig some more, and this can tie up valuable resources like time, energy, and money.
Professionally, set conditions for success from a third party and work towards meeting them together. For example, if it’s a business environment then let the customer tell you what success is. If it’s an academic environment, let the professor define success. If it’s a hospital, let patient quality and value of care guide you. Treat these conditions for success as a “north star.” From there, Te and Ti can combine their strengths to create solutions that are both logically sound (Ti) and effective (Te) to achieve the best results guided by the third party.
The main advantage of having Te is straightforward: Te users have an easier time navigating and succeeding in the real world simply because we listen to it and we make sense of what it’s telling us. We study the world, organize and analyze the information, and make data-driven decisions using our auxiliary function (Ni for ENTJs, Si for ESTJs) based on that analysis.
If you want to get accepted into Harvard University– you don’t tell Harvard what kind of student they want– you collect data on what statistics (GPA, major, test scores) they accept and adapt those traits to your application.
If you want to run a successful company, you don’t tell your customers what they should buy– you collect data on their preferences and create a product to meet their needs.
If you want the world to accept your logic, you don’t unilaterally rationalize it in your mind and then tell the world what they need– you ask them what they want and respond accordingly.
This is why ENTJs and ESTJs are often described as pragmatic and associated with high achievement, our traits are adapted for the environment we live in– reality.
tangentwithtanner
prguitarman
gummygunk
pixelskylines
