Ti vs. Fi: Morality and Values

I’ve struggled for a long time to try to distinguish the morality of Introverted Feeling, or Fi, from the morality of Introverted Thinking, or Ti. Introverted Thinkers, or Ti users, have a reputation of being morally gray: the rogues and the bounty hunters. Amoral. However, this stereotype is largely driven by fiction. I know plenty of Ti users who I would never describe as lacking values. I usually can see the difference between Ti and Fi in this area, but I could never figure out how to put words to the distinction. However, the other day Ryan made an excellent observation about Ti vs. Fi that clicked some pieces into place for me. This thought that I’m about to share is in its infancy, but I did bounce it off some others, and I think it holds up. Hopefully this also makes sense to those of you who are reading this.

What is Introverted Thinking (Ti) and Introverted Feeling (Fi)?

To understand what I’m about to discuss, there are a couple of basic prerequisites that I need to go over. The first is that Ti, or Introverted Thinking, and Fi, or Introverted Feeling, are introverted judging functions. They are essentially the introspection functions, the functions that look inward and form judgments about self and define personal rules or boundaries. Ti differs from Fi in the sense that it is not what is typically referred to as a “value” function. Now, bear in mind, that this is a bit of a misnomer, because all functions have “values” or things that they “value”. However, the feeling functions specifically tend to deal in the realm of values that are often identified as morals. This is not to say that any type is inherently more “moral” than another, but the values being focused on by feeling functions often have a much more magnified focus on the human element.

Identity

The second thing you need to understand going forward is the basics of Ti identity versus Fi identity. This will only be brief, so if you wish to explore this subject further, check out “Do Ti Users Lack Identity?” and Is Fi Absolute? In short, Fi and Ti are both identity functions (because they’re concerned with introspection and forming personal judgements), but they work in opposite directions, in a sense. Fi users look inward and connect with their feelings to form values and a personal ideal. They decide what they want to be (or should be) and adjust themselves to match that ideal. (Obviously, everyone is capable of being hypocritical, but I’m assuming healthy behavior here.) The culmination of everything that Fi does is a direct result of being both an introverted judging function and a “value” function.

Ti identity is much different. Ti is focused on judgements, but less on values. Typically, the mark of an actual Ti user is someone who does not usually think about their identity, someone who essentially views the concept as irrelevant. Ti users are typically in touch with their “identity” in the sense that they act in accordance with themselves (or their personal judgements) first and foremost, but an intentional/conscious focus on identity or “who am I?” is not usually in the cards. They just do what they do without giving a whole lot of thought as to how it connects to who they are.

Ti users tend to have certain ways that they do NOT want to be seen, which is different than having a specific way that they want to be seen. They haven’t formed an internal ideal from an image or value standpoint. That’s not what Ti does. If a Ti user is thinking about identity, it’s usually in relation to some very specific reputation-related contexts, which would be due to the influence of Fe, or Extraverted Feeling. For instance, you could say a lot of inaccurate things about me and I won’t care. (I’m an ISTP). However, if you call me emotional or identify me as such, I’ll probably start dying inside (assuming you have any degree of credibility in my eyes).

Introverted Feeling (Fi) Values

For an Fi user, their values are a core part of their identity. The two are closely intertwined. I believe this causes their values to be more universal, absolute, or black-and-white. Try not to nitpick my wording and let me attempt to explain what I mean. To be honest, I’ve been struggling to find the best word to relay the correct nuance, so I’ve given up overthinking it. Basically, the higher the Fi, the more flexible it should be. Te is what brings about the absolute or rigid nature. In a sense, think of Te as the enforcer or the stabilizer. Lower Fi typically causes the user’s identity to become more and more rigid. The same goes for a dominant Fi user who is leaning on their Te, or even gripping. Rigidity results. However, healthy high Fi should be flexible, updating their values and identity with their life experiences. Because values and identity are so closely intertwined for them, introspection from a “who am I?” standpoint becomes very important for high Fi users. They can’t form Te goals until they know who they are or who want to be.

So, when an Fi user forms a rule or a value, they want it to be 100% applicable in every scenario; something they can stand by, because these values are a reflection of who they are. As they cross new scenarios and take in new information, they will adjust their values to account for these scenarios, so that the value can once again be applied without exception. In summary, they will fashion their values and rules so that there doesn’t need to be exceptions, or that their boundaries will never have to be crossed. This is why the Fi/Te axis as a whole tends to be fairly “black-and-white”. Either the action is within the allowable parameters or it is not. There typically isn’t a lot of room for interpretation.

Introverted Thinking (Ti) Rules

Ti is very contextual. While Fi users are determining their actions based on a standard of behavior, an ideal picture of who they should be, Ti users have a slightly different approach. Ti users form behavioral rules that are intricately tied to context (ie: contextual rules for behavior). They will have specific lines that they refuse to cross or rules that they must follow given a certain scenario. Because these rules are so heavily dependent on context, Ti users tend to look somewhat wishy-washy or “morally gray”. Allow me to explain.

I have an internet rule that I abide by, that basically says that I will not say anything online that I wouldn’t say in person. However, this rule doesn’t universally apply to every situation. There are exceptions. For instance, I occasionally vent to certain people, which causes me to share emotional things that I probably wouldn’t be capable of verbalizing in person. I’ve also discussed my Enneagram type with certain people, and subsequently said things that I probably wouldn’t have said in person. But, these exceptions are irrelevant, and not something I view as hypocrisy because the rule wasn’t made to prevent me from doing those things. (Honestly, it’s probably fairly healthy I allow myself that outlet.) The rule was specifically made to prevent me from becoming one of those two-faced, cowardly, internet jerks, and it only applies in that context. Every time I run across another scenario where the rule doesn’t apply, I just wave it away as another exception.

It’s almost like Ti users stumble across certain scenarios, make a mistake (or observe a mistake), realize what should have been done instead, and then create a rule to protect themselves in the future. However, an onlooker might hear the rule, observe the Ti user, and believe wholeheartedly that the Ti user is breaking their own rule, because the onlooker doesn’t understand the context from which the rule was formed. If the Ti user has their “hypocrisy” pointed out, they’ll probably just shrug their shoulders, claim it’s an exception to the rule, and move on without giving it much thought. “Meh. The rule doesn’t apply here” or “That doesn’t count.” It’s not hard to see how this can make Ti users look apathetic or hypocritical.

When I was presenting this idea to some others, a fellow Ti user from Discord, Cipher, speculated that this might be why he never remembers any of his rules: they usually only come to mind when confronted with an applicable situation.

Some closing thoughts…

“That’s not who I am” is typically a strong indicator for Fi, because that’s the way Fi users think. When they act out of character, refuse to do something against their values, or act out of sync with their ideal, that’s a common response for them, whether stated as a defense or an offense. This makes sense given everything I’ve explained about Fi thus far. Ti users typically say something more along the lines of “That’s not something I do.” They usually refer to it more as an action, then a reference to their identity, because Ti users tend to naturally be detached from self in that way. It’s almost like a personal rule that they view as impersonal. Parameters that have been set to navigate life situations.