Introverted Thinking (Ti): Potential Logical Flaws

I’ve been seeing a trend lately that bugs me so I feel compelled to talk about it in depth. There seems to be this belief among high Ti users, or Introverted Thinkers, (specifically the dominants) that Ti possesses perfect logic and only the perceiving functions feeding it information will cause logical flaws or errors in the Ti framework. As a Ti dominant myself, it’s a nice thought, but from a realistic standpoint, I see it as both arrogant and conceited.

Basically, what people say is that Ti, or Introverted Thinking, will always do what it does best, but Ti can only work with the information given to it. So, if it’s fed bad information, it will derive a false conclusion. Granted, this statement by itself is not incorrect. It is a thing that happens to Ti users. However, to say that Ti will never hold any of the blame, is incorrect, and I’m going to explain why.

The Basic Principle

As mentioned, the perceiving functions present us with information. However, what I think people forget is that our judging functions choose what to accept and reject. Introverted Thinking (Ti) is no different. Ti is not some completely unbiased function that automatically takes into account everything fed to it. It weeds through information, and determines what is true and what is false. This process can easily be corrupted or biased. Let me give you a couple of reasons why.

Potential Downfalls

1. We are all emotional people

I know this is rough for thinkers to swallow, but everyone is emotional. As high Ti users, we may choose to smother our emotions. We may choose to ignore them. We may choose to pretend they don’t exist, but that doesn’t make it true. Emotions, uncontrolled and unharnessed, can easily mess up how we interpret information that is presented to us. As people who are traditionally considered “unemotional”, sometimes we fail to realize when emotions are actually affecting our judgement, and then emotional bias slips in unbeknownst to ourselves. Or, perhaps, somewhere in the depth of our mind, we realize that it is emotion, but we rationalize the emotion away, and convince ourselves that our stance is based on logic. I’ve seen it happen before where Ti users will connect things together and make what they’re saying sound logical, when in reality, they’re rationalizing an emotional stance and presenting it in a “logical” way. It will look logical. It will sound rational, but the person who understands that Ti user intimately can probably recognize what is actually going on under the surface. Emotions like fear and pride can be powerful influencers.

2. Attachment to the internal framework

Introverted Thinkers form a very intricate internal structure of logic that ties together beautifully in their mind. It is perfectly consistent and represents their truth. No Ti user wants to tear that down. Obviously, I’m not saying we won’t, but sometimes I’ll see Ti users stubbornly cling to something because they want to believe it… because it makes sense in their head. They don’t want to destroy what they’ve built, and they have faith that it’s correct. Ergo, sometimes they’ll intentionally ignore a piece of information that contradicts their internal framework, because they are ultimately deferring to that framework. They can get so wrapped up in their internal world that they reject external, real world facts, because those facts don’t line up with what they know. Granted, sometimes the act of doing this is insightful because the fact is actually false. However, other times, they are failing to recognize that it is their framework that is flawed, and not the fact. As I mentioned earlier, this type of thing is NOT a failure on the part of the perceiving functions, because the perceiving functions did present the information. It is the JUDGING function that intentionally and consciously rejected it. Of course, for a Ti user in this scenario, the offending judging function would be Ti.

Perhaps you could suggest that the perceiving functions failed to notice information prior to that point that would have supported the fact. However, it would be flawed to make that assumption. Sure, it’s a plausible scenario that could definitely happen. However, there is an alternative that is equally plausible. If a Ti user rejected a piece of information once, is it not logical to assume that they’ve done this at multiple points throughout their life? Does anyone have a perfect memory to recall every single thing that they’ve ever come across so that when a contradicting fact arises, they can trace back to everything that they’ve ever heard that might have supported that? That would be a rather rare person. No, the reality is that a Ti user will come across something contradicting, discard it, and move on…. Unless, of course, they realize that the contradicting information might actually be true. Then what happens? Research, research, research to gather the supporting information that they failed to intake previously.

Let’s look at this another way

For a second, I will assume that Introverted Thinking is, indeed, infallible. Can we say that same thing about any of the other functions? The Te users (INTJs especially) love to assume that any conclusion they draw cannot be false. Meanwhile, us Ti users are quick to tear down authoritative sources, and proclaim facts as false. So, while they’re making their arrogant statement, we’re making ours. If  the two approach each other with different viewpoints and beliefs, which is right? It’s a contradiction. (Along those same lines, how often do you see two IXTPs actually agree completely with one another? But that’s an aside.) So, are we going to say that Ti is infallible, and Te is not? If the Ti users are going to rip the authorities and the facts, does that not imply that we think Te is highly prone to error while Ti is not? Or, are we going to say that for the Te users, it’s the fault of their perceiving function as well? If we take that stance, now we’re saying that anyone who is a dominant perceiver is more likely to draw a false conclusion that anyone who is a dominant judger. (Sorry, INTJs. You’re doomed to always be inferior.) That doesn’t seem right, or fair, or balanced. To me, all of these scenarios reek of bias.

In conclusion…

It’s not my intention to sit here and tear down the Ti users. Like I’ve said many times on this blog, I’m a Ti dominant. I like my Ti. I rely on it constantly. However, one of the goals on this blog is to present the cognitive functions and the types in a more realistic and balanced manner. Personally, I feel especially qualified to bash my own function, since it’s not as if I’m over here claiming superiority with a better set of functions. My Ti runs into road blocks like I elaborated on in this article. That’s a reality, which I try to remind myself of so that I don’t ultimately end up with a narrow-minded and flawed outlook in life.