Download Episode Here – right click link and select “Save Link As…”
In this episode Joel and Antonia talk about why we need Introverted Thinking in our modern world of misinformation and confusing logic.
In this podcast you’ll find:
- When you look at MBTI, we see 16 patterns of people as they show up down thru history.
- Macrocosms – social manifestations
- Certain characteristics are more or less favored by society.
- In the US, there has been emphasis placed on Judger qualities – Si, Ni, Te, Fe
- Lots of time and effort poured into infrastructure. Emphasis on conformity. Collective ideal.
- We can see a shift to more of a perceiving style.
- Preferences of whole societies can shift over time. We as individuals can’t change types, but societies can.
- Henry Ford is famous for saying, “You can have any color you want, as long as it’s black.”
- Burger King is famous for saying, “Have it your way.”
- We went from a one-size-fits-all society to one that enjoys unlimited choices.
- The message in the middle part of 20th century was one of conformity – Graves level 4
- In the 80s a lot of people started graduating to Graves Level 5. Things started becoming more individualistic.
- When done poorly, Introverted Thinking (Ti) is a dull blade, and it hurts. When done well it is a sharp sword.
- As a society, we aren’t using Ti well, but we want to be.
- Modern media is reinforcing this idea that Ti is becoming more popular.
- John Oliver
- John Stewart
- Adam Ruins Everything
- Trump likely uses Ti as a copilot. He’s not using it well.
- People want to rest into truth, no matter how unpopular
- What the internet did for people was give them the ability to see how much contradictory info is out there.
- People lose faith in the experts. We have to be the final determiners of good/bad info.
- Facebook has announced it is going to start censoring misleading news sources, which is going to remove people’s ability to vet their news sources.
- Common Core teaches kids how to think. How to vet info.
- Most people are terrible with logic. It’s not because people don’t have the ability to be analytical, it’s that they aren’t taught formal logic.
- Consumer technology has outpaced us socially. We are now required to use formal logic.
- Are we able to develop this process fast enough to meet the challenges demanded of us?
- Youtube comments
- If you have even a hair’s breath of emotion fueling your evaluation or assessment, you are not using Ti. Ti is the best when completely emotionally neutral.
- Bias lives in the emotional expression of want. You want to believe something.
- If you are getting emotionally triggered and you can’t hold it at bay, you aren’t using Ti.
- That requires a level of rigor that even people who have it as a strength take time to perfect
- If you get emotionally triggered, you cannot look at a piece of data with clarity. Clarity requires an emotionally neutral stance.
- This is tough. Society as a whole is crappy at this. Everything is triggering.
- For society to get better at this everybody has to stop being so triggered. They have to stop being so emotional.
- Snopes.com
- Politifact.com
- Julian Assange probably a Ti user.
- Most people aren’t that concerned with facts. They are concerned with what they want.
- Teaching children how to think is vital.
- Don’t assume you are good at logic when you aren’t.
- People believe everything they think. So it must be true. It must be rational. Why doesn’t everyone else see it?
- Righteous indignation – If you say something that bothers me, you have to be set right.
- Unskilled Ti hurts people.
- Build skill with it.
- Stop using it as a weapon. It is better not to use it at all than to use it poorly.
- Don’t dismiss information when it comes your way just because it runs contrary to what you want to believe.
- If Ti is your strength, make sure you are using it well. Make sure people can rest into your data.
- The ideal world is where all TPs are rooting out their biases, and the world welcomes their data.
- Bernie Sanders also uses Ti.
- Non-triggered truth-telling.
- There is no such things as empirical truth. But that doesn’t mean that there aren’t truths that are closer to empirical truths than others. Not a toggle switch, more of a sliding scale.
- Show up with clean data.
- The most damaging emotion right now is righteous indignation.
- Introverted Feeling (Fi) needs to be tempered with Ti or we will lose our way.
- Fi idealism can become its weakness if it tries to foist that off on others.
- Extreme social shame if someone isn’t on the same level.
- Muscle people into the right behavior.
- Ti won’t do that. It’s not sustainable. Ti is seeking the sustainable truth. Muscling someone with social censure is not a viable tool. That’s more like Fe gone wrong.
- Ti is showing us a more accurate perception of where we are in the stream of time.
- Dial back that indignation. Get more precise collectively
- Car Model
To subscribe to the podcast, please use the links below:
Subscribe with iTunes
Non iTunes Link
Download The Android App
Subscribe on Soundcloud
Subscribe with Stitcher
Subscribe on Google Play
If you like the podcast and want to help us out in return, please leave an honest rating and review on iTunes by clicking here. It will help the show and its ranking in iTunes immensely! We would be eternally grateful!
Want to learn more?
Discover Your Personal Genius
We want to hear from you. Leave your comments below…
Share:
Podcast - Episode 0147 - When World Events Get You Down
Podcast - Episode 0149 - How To Get Better At Personality Typing
23 comments
Hi guys,
I am in awe of the insight in this podcast very iNtuitive! Thanks.
As you may know I am a professional engineer, so I focused all of my early and middle life studying and understanding the physical world.
But all of my being has ditched that pursuit (perhaps out of boredom), but I believe it is the realisation that our western society is broken. The majority of my interests now are on psychology (positive psychology) and neuroscience.
I observed at an early age that the school system was broken, and it has only gotten worse (at least here in Australia), although I am interested in learning more about ‘common core’. But their are an amazing amount of “individuals” doing great work in this area.
I would love to be able to follow your advice and be the ‘best’ introverted Thinker I can, and believe I have done a lot of work in this area, but I would really appreciate some practical advice on ‘HOW’.
I found a big blind spot of my own and possible all Ti Ne users is the lack of understanding other types. Clearly if Ti could identify and present the “truth” in ways that appeal to other types "particularly F users who base their decisions on the impact to people, etc. being able to show an accurate ‘picture’ of how this data translates to people they care about would certainly afford a lot more buy in than simply presenting the most accurate ‘data’.
In my own experience I have personally felt the effects of the old “expert” model of the universe, where my insight is ignored or down right rejected because I am not a ‘perceived’, expert in the specific field I am addressing.
The world does not understand how dominant Ti works and healthy Auxillary Ti for that matter. While we may lack experience Ti users can and do become experts in any field that interests them enough. In fact I would go as far to say that a motivated Ti user can overcome and in many ways exceed the knowledge of very experienced non Ti users because they lack a great deal of many limiting beliefs caused by confirmation bios, building their foundations in outdated or superseded knowledge or models etc, which gives them a unique ability to have “fresh eyes/insight”.
I would like to understand more about how and why Ti users purpose ‘finding transperancy and truth’ is so distant to other types.
Is it because others see the value of interpersonal relationships that are built upon mutual benefit and maintaining at least a perception of favorable treatment is benificial to building and maintaining such structures, although the psyche identifies the possible negative impacts of this discriminatory system of possibly ‘not being in the in crowd’, the ego believes it is fundamentally worthy of being treated favourably compared to the average? and doing x, y, z will display or atleast provide the illusion of worthiness? Or an ego that allows the individual to believe they really are “all that” and deserving more than many/all others.
And if that is true, why and how does Ti remove those ‘apparent’ superiority beliefs? Can it be that Ti provides a fundamental understanding that ‘truth’ is elusive, subjective and time limited or transperancy of data is are fundamental to the search for truth, that the psyche needs transparency (atleast internally) for this work to be done, and for dominant Ti users the inside world is the “real world” therefore they truly need to live in an outwardly transparent world for healthy function.
I have indeed been subject to a total and at least massively dissatvantaged because my transparency is often mistaken for grandios or even being straight out misleading because the level of openness and transparency I can and do offer (not to be confused with vulnerability) is so lacking/unusual in society.
I know your podcast is amazing and covers a great deal, but is there any advice you can offer on how a Ti user or the general public can work around these fundamental “trust” issues related to “radical honesty” and unusual levels of transparency?
Kindest Regards
Justin
Thanks for your comment Jaime! INFJ here. I agree with you. When I read some piece of inflammatory news, it gets my emotions riled. I feel anger and frustration at the world. When I find out the piece of info is false, it doesn’t mellow my emotion. Now I’m even angrier at whoever put that news out there, and whoever was stupid enough to share it without making sure it’s true. I have stopped most of my Facebook surfing because of this. I would prefer those news sources didn’t exist, and I can’t figure out why people see a need to create them. Except for money. NPR had a recent segment on this: http://www.npr.org/sections/alltechconsidered/2016/11/23/503146770/npr-finds-the-head-of-a-covert-fake-news-operation-in-the-suburbs
I have too many troubles understanding the diffrences between Ti and Te. I understand that Te users try to make systems and Ti users try to find incongruences… but I just don’t get the way that Ti users do that.
Someone told me once that Ti users have a mind full of data, they use that data to make their own conclusions, and they live by those conclusions no matter what other people think…
If that is true… how Te users Work? Do they use Data to make their opinions? or they take the data and use it to built something without reasoning?…
I probably get it all wrong… or maybe not, please help
I have a few questions, thoughts, etc.
I’m an INTJ. At first I was listening, I was thinking of myself as an introverted thinker, but then I checked and INTJs are extraverted thinkers. But I didn’t feel like a lot of what was said about extraverted thinkers was true to me. But then, INTJs are full of contradictions.
I have assumed for a very long time that logic was innate. A few years ago, my mom (INFP) told me that she had to take a logic class in college and she hated it. I couldn’t believe there was a class to teach logic! To me, that was like a class teaching how to breathe. I couldn’t comprehend how anyone would move throughout the world without logic! Haha. I have strongly believed for a long time that people will make the right decisions if they know the truth/facts. Sadly, I’m reassured everyday that many people don’t care about facts.
I find it hard to believe Trnmp is an introverted thinker. Or a thinker at all. His actions seem emotionally haphazard and sporadic to me. For example, you said that data shouldn’t trigger emotions when using introverted thinking. He is emotionally triggered all. The. Time. If facts dispute his narrative, he simply disregards them. For example, he said he can’t show his taxes because he’s being audited. But the IRS explicitly said that doesn’t prohibit him from releasing them. Regardless, he says he can’t release them because he’s being audited. There is no logic, truth, or fact there. But maybe he is a type that uses Ti poorly, like a dull sword.
Facebook – one hand it is concerning that FB is censoring. On the other hand, I agree with Antonia that lots of people are terrible with logic and there isn’t time for people to catch up. Yes, people do need to learn these skills, but I don’t think FB is the place to do it. People on social media and FB in particular are usually in a bubble or an echo chamber. They are most like surrounded by people who share the same kinds of articles and will more likely support them than challenge them. And things on Facebook don’t stay there—people often talk about them in real life. So I don’t actually see people learning that way—if they were learning, it wouldn’t still be such an issue since this has been going for a while.
While analyzing data without emotion is good for a lot of topics, I think emotion is helpful in other topics. As an INTJ, I was resistant when I first realized this. But I’ve been going to therapy for years and have learned to use my emotions in ways that bolster my thinking. While one style may be a great skill to have, is using that skill without any input from others actually using that skill to the best of its ability? I’d say no, not always. If I’m looking at information, and I find a data point particularly disturbing, I investigate why I feel that way. It could be pointing me to an underlying issue that is influencing the context of the events that have created this data. And then I can look at that more in-depth. I think this thinking-feeling combo is especially helpful when examining social issues. I haven’t always used my emotions well or at all, but I’ve been able to see new and exciting things since learning how to analyze them. It’d be interesting to hear about ways that others have used feeling to give their thinking an edge or vice versa.
I think the goal of the podcast wasn’t to say everyone needs to abandon their preferred cognitive functions in favor of Ti, but that it’s easy to assume you’re implementing it well when you have no reference point for how ‘done well’ looks. Moving people from, say, conscious incompetence (knowing how hard something is and respecting what it takes to be good at it) over unconscious incompetence (having no idea what goes into something and assuming being good at it is something everyone comes born with).
I think we’re saying the same thing, and I think encouraging courses like philosophy and formal logic in high school as required courses (not electives) would help make that happen.
A