All About Introverted Thinking (Ti), And How It Manifests As ALL 8 Cognitive Functions

I compiled descriptions from many websites (reddit, wikisocion, other russian socionics sites mostly), I hope this benefits you. This might be an exhaustive reading. This post will be continuously updated in the following weeks as I optimize and correct the compilated text for better understanding.

Before starting, read this excellent post on reddit about what Introverted thinking is.

Introverted thinking

• Prefers to work independently and autonomously
• Develops its own methods and strategies
• Evaluates / filters incoming information to ensure relevance and usefulness
• Inclined to place the interests of objective truth and fairness above his own interests and the interests of his family.
• Independent or self-directed projects of all sorts
• Evaluation according to impersonal laws (mercy vs. justice)
• Builds a precise categorical logical framework
• Uses categories that are created by and are unique to the individual (democratic vs aristocratic)
• Depends upon principles as the foundation for analytical decision making in the same way that beliefs are the foundation for values-based decision making
• Employs systems and categories to attain internal order and precision.
• Focuses on how tasks get accomplished - process oriented (ends vs means)
• First of all considers his own conscience and is least of all inclined to be dependent on anothers' opinion and authorities acknowledged in society. 

+ Ti

specificity, itemization, detailed study, thoroughness, accuracy, strictness, place in hierarchy, regulations, instructions, choosing the best option, precision of function, logic of organization, indicators, reporting;

− Ti 

abstractness, generality, universality, system, classification, typology, general regularities, objectivity, truth, justice, comprehensive review, analysis, dissection, criteria;

Ti is generally associated with the ability to recognize logical consistency and correctness, generate and apply classifications and systems, organize systematic and conceptual understanding, see logical connections between things (including logical similarities, differences, and correlations) by means of instinctive feelings of validity, symmetry, and even beauty. It is like common sense, in that it builds on one's expectations of reality, through a somewhat personal, though explicable, understanding of general truths and how they are manifested.

Types that value Ti naturally question the consistency of beliefs that are taken for granted in everyday life. They strongly prefer to make decisions based on their own experience and judgement, as opposed to relying on external authorities for knowledge, which they use only as a last resort. They also have respect for people with clearly defined and internally consistent opinions, believing that a sense of internal certainty is necessary for orienting oneself in life. To these types, one's personal standards of truth are more reliable than public consensus.

They see overly pragmatic views as shallow, and try to limit public discussion of mundane practical matters. They are especially sensitive to redundant information.

We call 'logical' those feelings that arise from the process of comparing one object to another on the basis of some objective criteria — for example, a sense of distance, weight, volume, worth, strength, quality, etc. These are feelings of objective evaluation, which in certain situations help to activate or passivate the person who experiences them. Incoming information is recognized by such an individual as a sense of objects' proper or improper correlation and proportion, a sense of balance or imbalance between the objects, or a sense of understanding or lack of understanding of the advantages of one object over another. This also includes all feelings that result from knowing or not knowing objects and phenomena — curiosity, respect, fear, and a sense of the logicalness or illogicalness of things, as well as a sense of one's own power or powerlessness before different objects.
All these feelings we shall call logical. Their sum is a person's sense of logic, which is developed to different extents in different people. We might say that logical feelings convey information about presence or lack of knowledge, comparability and incomparability, and the presence or lack of balance between them, as well as about the space and location of object within it. These feelings are called objective because they do not take into consideration the interests and needs of the person him/herself, but only such correlations of objective qualities. This perceptual element determines a person's ability or inability to see the objective, logical relations between objects or their components.

Introverted Thinking as (1st) Leading function

(LII - INTj/ LSI - ISTj) "The individual embodies this function."

When this element is in the leading position, the individual is distinguished by his or her ability to logically evaluate relations of the objective static reality, or the world of objects. He also has the ability to change the interrelations between properties of different objects according to his wishes, and through this influence objects themselves as carriers of these properties. Correct evaluation of one's relations with other objects helps the individual know which objects should be avoided, and which can be "hunted." Such an individual is able to set his logic — or his knowledge of objectifiable reality, patterns, laws, and correlations of the objective world — in opposition to knowledge of others. He has the ability to mold and perfect not only his own knowledge of objectifiable reality, but also that of other people. This creates a feeling of power when clashing with other people's logic or lack thereof.

The individual views reality through the lens of logic, immediately recognizing the correctness and appropriateness of things and their proper place in reality and in his system of views and behavior. He freely makes logical assertions, often exaggerated, about new information and experience. He holds highest those rules to which exceptions do not exist, and is a habitual critic of people or things that don't follow a set of rules, whether they are those accepted by the community, or his own, or even the other person's. Although he is able to adopt others' rules, his own are always the last word, and these are subject to continual refinement. Often seen as "demanding", due to high standards.

Very attached to his understanding of something, his thinking, his logic and concepts, confident and conservative in these. It is impossible to convince him otherwise, as he "lives" by this, but does not necessarily share his understanding with others. If his understanding does not converge with facts, then at times he will judge the facts to be of lower value. Any attempts at criticizing his understanding make him feel irritated. He knows how reason logically, but does not like to defend his vision of the situation: "Those who understood - understood, the rest don't have it in them". Thus he often surrounds himself with those who accept his logical judgments and who do not make attempts to dispute them. Changes his thinking with great difficultly and needs a lot of time to reflect on mistakes. Likes it when everything converges with the way he understands it. If this cannot be achieved - experiences irritation. Therefore, one can only persuade him using solid arguments. He is often skeptical of new information, if he is unsure in something: everything must be carefully weighed before saying "yes." His thinking is like a foundament - it is solid, something that can be "leaned on" in any situation, thus in this matter there cannot be any risks. It is difficult to require from them to immediately approve someone else's views. In general, he tries to understand everything first, and only then accept it for himself. If it is something he cannot understand, then mastering new information progresses slowly, since it is difficult to accept it for himself. Thus he can spend very long time learning something before utilizing it, even if the question is very simple.

LII (Filatova/Reinin)

His thinking is analytical in its nature. He strives towards elucidation and understanding of general maxims, fundamental laws and regularities, as he investigates and gathers information. In his mind, LII builds a model that corresponds to his knowledge and experience, which is founded on his understanding of the surrounding events. If he has found and incorporated into his understanding some universal maxim, he will follow it with determination, regardless of opposition from others. By no means can he be distracted from what he deems to be the principal purpose of his life. He will abandon something he has started only if he, himself, becomes convinced of being mistaken.
His work and research often constitute the main purpose of his life. Many representatives of this type corresponds to the label "workaholic".
LII likes precision, accuracy, order; he is meticulous and discriminating in his reasoning. Finds pleasure in creating simple schematics, organizing everything "by the shelves", thinking and planning ahead. Considers that the behavior of people, especially at work, must correspond to specific logic and a definite system. Immediately notes the illogicality and contradictions present in the actions of people and, as much as possible, attempts to introduce corrections: he can express it as a criticism or offer to help, depending on whom he's dealing with. Generally, everything that is illogical and disorderly irritates him, as well as inconsiderate people.

My understanding, my worldview, and my school. “My logic is the best logic in the world”. It is difficult to convince a Robespierre of anything that contradicts her system of beliefs. She usually has difficulty explaining her own system. Only serious circumstances may change anything in the area of the first function. She does not accept anything by faith in this area. At times there are objective circumstances that are difficult to ignore but at the same time they contradict a Robespierre’s system of beliefs, her idea of the world. Then she needs time to work on a new description of the world. A Robespierre may go on with life only after the worldview is integral once again. A Robespierre just does not instantly accept anything new: she will listen to your arguments, but she needs time to evaluate, review new data, process it and either accept or reject it. She would not agree with you on the spot. The first function is conservative, it serves as a base, and the base should be firm and strong.
Our limited individual consciousness needs a base. A person needs to know beyond any shadow of a doubt that he exists. This type thinks: “I cannot think if my thinking is not based on a definite world view”.
People with their relationships are in the area of the fourth function. He is not a people person. A Robespierre has a primitive idea of humanity: people are divided into those who are bad, and those who are good. He sees the world in black and white without shadows. (There are types who do not divide people into two categories: “In fact, the world is too complex to limit it by two categories”.) “People will act according to their nature”, - this is a common opinion but a Robespierre does not follow it.

LII naturally assesses statements, opinions, and actions in terms of conformance to certain principles. These principles may in practice be rules of thumb based on experience, but LIIs will usually appeal to more general, self-evident reasons, if the need arises. The LII is most engaged in communication when they are critically analyzing people's decisions and actions as well as how they generally are or are not consistent with certain pre-established goals. their dual, the ESE, likes hearing the LII's judgment, and simultaneously softens its edge by shifting their focus to how they are communicating their ideas, letting them see the intellectual thought process from the outside. The ESE appreciates and praises their ability to take the information seriously, but the ESE will find funny ways of reminding the LII of how they are coming across when they seem more serious than they realize.
"Just because" is not in an LII's vocabulary. If there is a reason for something, the LII will probably want to find it. The LII strives to reduce things to their most essential aspects, and mentally recreate the whole from the bottom up. The LII's theoretical tendencies can often leave him out of touch with reality, and if unchecked may lead to abstract theories that make logical sense but have little bearing on the real world.
The LII may explore many avenues of thought, but in the end only tell others his refined conclusions, because he sees the intermediate steps as irrelevant. He is often too concise for his own good, making it difficult for others to understand his ideas.
"Fairness - is my calling, my occupation." The INTj (LII) is always a passionate fighter for fairness. He considers that everything in this world must be logical, and, therefore - just and fair. The LII often contemplates on the topic of creation of a fair society, about the establishment of a form of governance which must start its existence from putting severe penalties on all those who conduct themselves unfairly, that is, those who violate the very principles of fairness. (The idea of the "Judgement Day".)
Any of the representatives of this type shares the notion expressed in the U.S. Declaration of Independence: "... that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness."
The INTj by his nature is deeply democratic. Democracy the LII understands as the freedom in possibilities of choice. He considers that a society can expect a person to hold full responsibility for his or her actions only when each member of the society obtains full freedom in choosing how to act and behave.
The INTj considers that order and discipline in a society much be founded not on fear but on conscience. Thus he views any punishment of a "violator" as an education of his conscience, i.e. something done for that person's own good. The LII usually holds the view that any penalty or punishment is effective only when the person realizes and acknowledges his own fault.
The INTj tries to choose methods of disciplinary influence with intelligence and purpose. Usually his punishment includes an educational element: the guilty person must be shown and proven his fault. The LII constructs the proof of his fault so logically and clearly that it is difficult to object and argue with him. (In part because all of LII's proofs, in their essence, come down to ideational notions of the "highest justice" and the "objective truth", while persuading him otherwise or proving to him that his ideas - are only abstract notions, by which it's impossible to evaluate concrete real life circumstances and conditions, is impossible, since such a point of view in his opinion would lead to disarray and chaos, which he considers to be dangerous to society.)
The LII always has to prove his rightness. He doesn't like to persuade, and particularly - to ask, plead, or request.
The LII makes increasing demands of others only when he can meet them himself.
"I think - therefore, I am." By nature the LII has been endowed with strongly developed logic and an aptitude for analytical thinking. He likes to think about different models, structures, schemes, and classifications. In any phenomena and events, he searches and finds the original causes of present contradictions and illogicalities.
The LII strives for logical harmony and logical order.
The main demand of LII's logical program - is objective truth, the criterion which considers not so much practice as the wholesomeness and logical consistency. "Truth - is a whole." (Hegel)
All common and ethical situations the LII examines from the point of view of logic. Moreover, the LII dismisses any extraneous in his view details, paying more attention to the main general regularities ("global logic").**
[**Editor's note: This is conditioned by LII's particular form of thinking.]
The LII has a highly developed sense of fairness. Protecting people who were treated unfairly, the LII frequently disregards his own safety and benefit. Out of considerations of protection of fairness, he can turn down a brilliant professional career and switch to social activities (example of academic A. D. Saharov).
The LII is inclined to place the interests of truth and fairness above his own interests and the interests of his family.
In making decisions, the LII first of all considers his own conscience and is least of all inclined to be dependent on another's opinion and authorities acknowledged in society.
Adopting any idea, the LII becomes its constant and loyal supporter and serves it in the most fanatical manner: he subordinates his thoughts and actions to this idea, as well as his lifestyle. In such case, the LII is least inclined to consider public opinion. If, as a result of fighting for his idea, the LII finds himself in conditions where his idea coincides the predominant opinions in society (for example, a LII dissident finally ends up in "free country"), he feels certain disappointment due to having to live like everyone else.
The LII feels somewhat empty when the element of "struggle for an idea" is absent from his life. The state of fighting and struggling becomes too natural for him and needed as a norm of life. In this case the LII gets ready to search for a new progressive idea that can "improve" society. Even if the new idea is not as extensive and grandiose as the previous one, and does not demand as much self-renunciation, the LII is content to use it to fill in the formed emptiness. The LII, however, does not get boggled by minor "toying" ideas. If he doesn't find a sufficiently large scale idea, he allows himself to live "like everyone else".
The LII is frequently socially and politically active (a quality that is inherent to all representatives of first and second quadra). He is always moved by problems of society in which he lives, concerned and worries by social-humanitarian problems of his surroundings.
The LII is usually unwavering in his conclusions. He is confident in that which is logical cannot be bad.
"Knowledge will save the world." The LII specializes not so much in broadening the extent of human knowledge, as in deepening it.
He is often in the state of searching and researching new information. Pays attention to the credibility and authenticity of information. If he needs to know something important, he prefers not to ask other people but seek references in books, articles, research papers, timetables, graphics, etc. He avoids referencing questionable, dubious information.

LSI (FIlatova/Reinin) 

Logically sensible and elegant system – this is the foundation for everything. LSI attempts to find such logical system, to become incorporated into it, to follow it and to perfect it. He analyzes and thinks over everything that surrounds him. From this information, he creates classifications and designations, creates hierarchies, derives maxims. All of this must be clearly stated and presented in various directions and instructions that aid in understanding and organizing life.
It is clear to him that whoever does not waver and follows such prescriptions will attain more in life, if he ceaselessly works hard and achieves commendable results – then such person will be able to attain a worthy place in society.
He is proud of having such ability, and it is exactly in this that he realizes himself. His pride suffers if another person is capable of doing the same job better than him. In such situations, LSI is capable of assuming work with thrice the force in order to not fall behind, for he finds it absolutely unacceptable to fall to a lower position in the conceptualized hierarchy he is aware of in his mind.
Such a person can be very productive. LSI is usually very conscientious: he considers it paramount that he works qualitatively, sequentially and systematically – with this he builds himself a foundation and asserts himself.
LSI is inclined towards realism – he’s interested primarily in concrete and actual problems, rather than hypothetical issues. LSI thinks deeply about any problem, tries to understand its essence and roots. When he doesn't understand something, he refers to established databases of information to check that everything corresponds to what is already known. In such situations, his mind starts to resemble a computer with a built in program, which he will follow without skipping a line.
Se – Implementation of the program. Represents his volitional qualities – purposefulness, competitiveness, power to make things happen. These are the basic traits he relies on to realize himself in practice. Efforts of LSI move him to higher positions – to prevail in a group, to correctly apply his abilities and to qualitatively organize his labor in work that is deserved. LSI lives within a system of his own understanding. He is watchful that others around him respect his position. Simple disagreement with his opinion, he may take to be a challenge or a threat, an encroachment upon his position, and immediately rebuff the supposed aggressor.
LSI possesses outstanding endurance and stamina. He tries to reach high quality in everything that he does – few can exceed him in the thoroughness, honesty and the aesthetic value of his work.

My understanding, my worldview, and my school. A Maxim's motto is: “I understand the world, therefore I exist”. It is impossible to make them change their mind. The world is the way I understand it. Their understanding is very conservative, crystallized. When attacked in the area of the first function, a Maxim becomes aggressive. In the area of the first function a person is confident of himself and leans on his own authority. In case of a Maxim this is their 'school', their view of the world, their ideas about the world. “I know how the world was made, who will teach me about heights and the depths. What evidence do you have to show for? I will explain away all your evidence!” If a Maxim runs into indisputable evidence which he can neither explain nor ignore, he (similar to a Robespierre) needs time to fill up the gaps in their belief system, to improve their world view making it complete and consistent from their point of view. He likes to analyze new data and draw independent conclusions, accepting or rejecting certain things. It is easy to drive a Maxim to aggression, just tell them: “Your teacher has no idea what he is talking about!” Their reaction may be absolutely inadequate. And since their creative function is physical action, anything within their hand's reach may be hurled at you. I tried talking to a Maxim in the same manner and was nearly hit by a heavy object thrown at me.

LSIs have a strong command of how various systems, structures, and hierarchies around them work, and always have a clear idea of how to implement them and improve them. LSIs quickly and easily determine what is correct and incorrect according to the systems they are familiar with.
LSIs tend to logically analyze just about everything — even close relationships. LSIs view their partners and other members of their household as part of a system which should have a certain structure and order to it. Everything in this system should run like clockwork — scheduling, daily routines, responsibilities in the relationship, and household management.
LSIs seek to attain an important role in an important system and to maintain and perfect it — often becoming the guardian or watchdog of the system.
LSIs do not often think about the ethics of the systems they maintain. Instead, they discuss the ethics of other systems using the language and customs of their own systems as truth, and make value judgments accordingly.
The ISTj (LSI) internally strives towards stability, a world that does not change, relationships that do not change - logically beautiful and coherent, calculated, and well reasoned through. For this very reason ISTj's type of intellect - is most the socially oriented one. As the social orientation of this sociotype is determined by the very "program" function of his intellect - the logic of concrete systems (just as the method of its realization, at which this program is oriented - the volitional administrative pressuring).
In its social mission, ISTj's logical program is meant to be an alternative to any sort of destabilization of his environment and surrounding structures: social, political, physical, biological, and so on. For this very reason, LSI's understanding of consistency, reasonableness, rationality is linked, first of all, to the organization of structural order (the "order of things") within the framework of some real, concretely existing system.
Outside of the system the ISTj never examines anything - such is the type of his intellect. Any phenomenon is viewed by him as part of certain existing system, that is regulated by certain patters and laws and a certain logical order, understanding which the LSI considers to be his obligation.
Perceiving his surrounding reality from the point of view of its systematization, logical design, and coherence, the ISTj is constantly analyzing the systems existing around himself - the system of logical and ethical interrelations, the systems of social structures, the system of views and opinions, the systems of life values.
The meaning and essence of any event or phenomenon the ISTj understands through awareness of its "systematization", as if asking himself the question: this is an isolated occurrence, or it is attributable to some system? Is this an isolated act, or is this a model of behavior? Is this an accidental actions or motion, or is there some system of views and values behind it?
To understand the inner essence of phenomena, to figure out and elucidate the cause-effect connections between phenomena of the most varied sort, to analyze the observed phenomena, to systematize the conclusions, to derive some more generalized definition and introduce it into an already existing system of views, to chose from all existing systems the one most suitable for achievement of specific goals and to improve it, to adapt this system to the specific social conditions, thinking it over and working through the smallest details - all of this is the sphere of on-going intellectual activity of any of the representatives of this type.
Due to intrinsic peculiarities of this type of intellect, representatives of this type find it most natural to perceive their surrounding reality as a certain centralized system. ("One sun shines on us all, one God exists for us all, one Church on this earth, and the Pope is its deputy!") But even if such perception substantially limits the method and forms of LSI's thinking, at the same time it expresses the specific directivity of his type intellect, namely - its social orientation, the arrangement and distribution of forces in a social system.
The ISTj never exists outside of the system of social relations, since the circle and the nature of his personal interrelations is already systematized in itself and takes a form of clear hierarchical subdivision, because this more easily fits into LSI's conception of the inherent "logical order of things". It is generally difficult for representatives of this type to consider or even imagine another point of view: it simply does not fit into their own set mental structure and their own system of views.
Under no circumstances can the ISTj be "by himself", "thinking only for himself", "himself only for himself" - this contradicts the program of his intellect too much. (Which, similarly to the program of his dual ENFj (EIE), has a goal of living through uncertain times, creating and introducing order, and surviving under extreme conditions. For this very reason this sociotype is characterized by certain conformism and loyalty with respect to the existing regime, since the ISTj often attempts to find an application for himself within an existing ruling social system. Even if a representative of this type exists as some "antisocial" element, nevertheless he cannot be "by himself". For the LSI it is difficult to be a "lone wolf" - his intuition is insufficiently developed for this; therefore, the LSI will for certain be organized within the framework some or another social structure, where he will fulfill all entrusted to him duties and hold the responsibility for his actions - another form of behavior for the LSI simply does not exist.)
Due to the fact that representatives of this type consider themselves (and every other individual) to be a part of an existing system of relations, they consider any manifestation of individualism to be unacceptable for themselves, going beyond the framework of what is permissible, undermining and weakening the social foundations, and introducing chaos and anarchy into the existing order of things. Therefore they see a special social significance in such activities as creation and introduction of instructions, procedures, social and juridical laws, establishment of standards and norms. LSIs treat their work with much responsibility, and therefore they are usually quite successful at work and in their career.
The distribution and arrangement of forces in a system, in LSI's opinion, must be logical, thoroughly reasoned, orderly, and fair. It must provide for a clear distribution of duties and corresponding measures of responsibility for these duties.
Similarly to the INTj (LII), the ISTj considers it necessary to edify and guide the public consciousness, with orientation of this activity being directed at the purposes and goals of the existing social system. For this very reason, representatives of this type are characterized not only by a social, but also by an ideological orientation. It is also for this very reason that just like his dual the ENFj (EIE), the ISTj is distinguished by an active social position and points of view. Representatives of this type are inclined to see their social destiny in ideological and educational work, in bringing up the necessary, pre-defined social consciousness in the younger generations.
The LSI considers the interchangeability of all of system's parts to be an indicator of high quality and viability of any system, as well as a guarantee of its stability. A person being a part of a social system must be interchangeable: in such conditions every person will be able to find his place in an already existing social system. And the system itself will be already be good by ensuring full occupation and employment to each person. (This state of things is especially convenient for the LSI in view of his weak intuition of possibilities.)
In LSI's opinion, a perfect system must not have any unique, irreplaceable elements. In working associations there must not be any irreplaceable specialists, any clearly expressed individualists, since this creates inequality in interrelations, produces confusion and uncertainty, and for this very reason becomes dangerous for the vital activity of the entire collective in critical situation. (In this, LSI's critical attitude towards openly individualistic positions is demonstrated once again: a person can be a bright individual as much as he or she desires it, but this does not give the right to consider oneself irreplaceable.)
LSI's thinking is very systematized. All that happens he attempts to explain from a logical point of view. (In logical issues and questions, it's not easy to convince the LSI otherwise or to confuse and throw him off his course.)
The ISTj knows how to estimate the intellectual potential of his conversation partner, although his evaluation frequently tends to be critical. In debates the LSI tries to take the initiative - the last word must remain with him. (Sensor!)
The ISTj magnificently well develops methods, calculates and compiles tables, graphics, textbooks, manuals, and so on.
A good speaker and presenter, the ISTj presents material sequentially, in stages, so that the entire logical chain is easily traceable up to its final logical conclusion. When speaking before an audience, the LSI tends to pose questions and answer them himself.
In expressing his point of view the LSI is quite pedantic. He will defend his system of views and values, expressing himself with extreme maximalism. It's not enough to say that the LSI relates with respect to the hierarchical social systems, where everyone needs to know his place: other systems he simply does not accept.
In LSI's opinion, the behavior of a person needs to correspond to his position, otherwise public consciousness will be disoriented by models of the "unbecoming" behavior, which will lead to the destabilization of the social system. Respect for the authority - is one of the most important values of his intellectual structure. Orientation at authority - is an important motivation for many of his actions, that in many respects determine the nature of LSI's relationships and behavior.
Gifted by nature with a phenomenal power of observation, the LSI thoroughly gathers and scrupulously processes factual bits of information, knowing how to find within the flow of information precisely what he needs. He is scrupulous and disapproves when some allegedly "unessential" minor facts get ignored or some seemingly insignificant errors in calculations are permitted - in this the ISTj is very specific and attentive.
People who don't know how to logically present their thoughts, who get distracted by tangential issues from the main topic or subject matter, tend to irritate and annoy people of this type. The LSI is annoyed by a negligent attitude and treatment of formulations, confusions and mix-ups in terminology and in definitions, and, the most terrible - confusion and chaos in presentation of thought.

Introverted Thinking as (2nd) Creative function

(ILE - ENTp/ SLE - ESTp) "The individual actively expresses this function."

ENTPs and ESTPs, with Ti as their creative function, use the creation and optimization of those systems to serve their purpose. In an ESTP, since they are betas, this shows a lot more through hierarchy and systematising people, while for ENTPs, it rather shows through a systematisation of information. The individual easily generates logical systems and formulations to explain a set of phenomena that he has experienced or studied. However, these logical systems or explanations are not viewed as permanent or all-encompassing, but can be improved upon or even discarded as new experience and information is added.

Likes to deliver long, detailed, creative explanations, excellent teacher or instructor, "I will explain for as long as they will listen, until I'm 100% sure that everyone understood everything." Asking him a question sometimes you will be listening to an answer for hours. Sometimes he simply looks for someone to speak about his understanding of something (escaping such a situation can be difficult, unless one tells him so directly). Something similar can be observed with objective logic, Te, as a second function, but here the emphasis is not on providing facts but rather on others gaining an understanding. For this reason, at times his explanations are simplified and delivered as if for little children. Such person is constantly looking for an audience with questions, but he explains material not in terms of knowledge, but from the standpoint of how he understands it, that is more lucidly and meticulously. He may gravitate towards a field where something has not been studied and understood before, may start exploring unknown for him spheres in which he has no qualifications, since this will allows him to develop and expand the scope of "understanding", which is very tempting for Ti as creative function.

ILE (Filatova/Reinin)

The ILE’s ability to think represents his strong side. In solving problems he always attempts to see the connection between the specific problem and the general situation; he tries to estimate his response on the basis of general consideration. If he estimates the essence/root, then the logical description becomes obvious; consequences derive themselves from their general conformity with the laws.
In work he is attracted to the development of strategic tasks, but not to the scrupulous study of fine details. The ILE’s principal difficulty is to settle down and concentrate on one area [of study/work]. To do this he needs to have a genuine need or especially strong interest.
After regarding and studying all of the data, which interests him, he is able to conclude facts where others haven’t, and to create a generalized theory of nature.
When only one aspect of his work fascinates him it sometimes occurs that he will inadequately perceive the situation. In such cases he will be defeated. However, this does not overly distress him: he can rapidly move away from an unsuccessful enterprise and direct himself towards anything new.
The ILE usually does not attempt to plan his activities in advance, but in a crisis situation he is capable of concentrating, of finding the set of variants for overcoming the deadlock, he knows how to yield to panic. ILE is able to inspire others with his enthusiasm, he may promise much but he is not always able to follow through: this is not because he refuses to acknowledge his shortcomings but because his euphoric, and enthusiastic, states may lead him to overestimate the possibilities of a new idea.
His basic interest often lies within the sphere of natural sciences, but is not excluded from humanitarian activity. If the idea of something suddenly lights up, in his mind, he will offer leisure time to it. He frequently varies the course of his life, from one profession to another.
He finds it difficult to subordinate himself to routine, to strictly regulate his work conditions; his impulsiveness may lead him to conflict with the authorities. However, should he find work that quenches the thirst of his creativity, he is able to bring himself to exhaustion whilst at the same time deriving great pleasure from his work.
Physical work may also inspire him, especially when it gives him the chance to comprehend something new, to discover the unexpected sides of his abilities. The possibility of learning something is sometimes more important than the eventual result.

Explanation, understanding. A Don Quixote produces original understanding and explanation of things. A Don Quixote feels that everything can be explained in a number of ways. Representatives of other types are amazed at the ease with which a Don Quixote is able to explain anything. For example, a Holmes is surprised and irritated: “What are you teaching me?! I am interested in the reality and the actual mechanics of things. Do you have experimental data, a method? Where did you study?” The excitement of a research is more important for a Don Quixote; he invents his own methods of research if needed. This IM type excels independently of their education and training. They have a strong research reflex. The sphere of risk is the intellect. They are busy creating new techniques and approaches, solving the unsolved, drawing ideas and concepts from other areas. As a result they can offer an explanation of external relationships, i.e. their “second function is about the third”. Anyone is capable of changing their own worldview, but a Don Quixote will pay a lower psychological price for the change than a Robespierre, a Maxim or a Holmes, they are not creative in this area. Don Quixote is not conservative here, he/she needs unexplained, tasks unfulfilled, problems that have not been solved or even put into words. Why quite a few of the Don Quixotes become scientists? In the sphere of science this type is realized as a functional system. Many ILEs look a bit paranoid: at the extreme a person of this type is a scientist who lays his life down for his ideas, neglects his family and physical health.
By the way, running a step forward, have a look at a Don Quixote's third function. We have a plus in the area of the third function. Public recognition is a source of energy for a Don Quixote. When he denies himself for the sake of his work and achieves success he often gets public recognition, people’s attention is centered on him, he thinks he is useful and needed in the society. There are two types – a Don Quixote and a Zhukov - whose public interests often coincide with their individual interests.

ILEs are obsessed with how things work, and how they will work together. Understanding how something works is merely the baseline for the ILE. When the ILE finds something new or interesting he thinks about how it could be used in conjunction with other objects he has come into contact with in the past.
The ILE will freely voice comments on whether a rule (especially one imposed on him by society) makes sense to him. If it does not, he will break the rule or find a creative way of mocking it to express his dissent, rather than working within the system itself to change the rule. Unlike a Ti-Dom type, he will often not replace the rule with one of his own.
The ILE is not afraid of discussing and arguing his views, and may appear to take them more seriously than he actually does. The ILE only makes use of structural frameworks if he can see some kind of intuitive relevance in them, e.g. to make sense of and solve a problem he is interested in. Thus his thoughts may often appear unstructured. Especially if his actions affect others, the ILE will make sure that they are logically consistent and fair.

SLE (Filatova/Reinin)

In order for them to emerge victorious in their struggles it is necessary for them to be able to select a principal direction, in which to orient themselves, to, in time, recognize the key links that connect different situations. The SLE is the most sober realist of all the psycho-types: their sensory recognition, combined with logical analysis reliant on a complete set of information, allows them to precisely reproduce a realistic picture of the world in their minds.
SLE logically, and sensibly, interprets the situation, checking for far reaching aftereffects of various events. Nothing is assumed upon blind faith. Beginning work, they fixedly consider all possibilities, collect all the necessary information about all aspects of the task at hand, and examine the opinions of all those surrounding, but always make the final decision themselves.
Wonderfully understand how best to organize work and the inability of others to act on such an optimal level. Thus the SLE will take upon themselves, not only their own responsibilities, but also the affairs of the surrounding people, to which SLE relates with sympathy and respect. Even if their (sometimes nitpicking) supervision begins to irritate another, that person will nevertheless take comfort in the possibility of feeling protected next to SLE, “the immovable wall.”
In every area of activity a rapid and perceptible return is paramount. They wish to see the result of their work, as far as possible, in a concrete-material sense: the constructed building, the launched rocket, the earned strategic success, the appreciation of a gift, the acquisition of an apartment, the completion of a machine..
He is able to consider an object, a situation, an event from several points of view, he can explain any phenomenon in several different ways. SLE is not conservative here. A Don Quixote having generated an idea hardly ever implements it in real life. A Zhukov, having the same creative function, comes up with an idea and then brings it about to the concrete world, i.e. Zhukov (ESTp) gives an idea a chance to live. For example, Sergei Korolev (a Zhukov) and Konstantin Tsiolkovsky (a Don Quixote) – they both dreamed to see humankind go into space. Korolev dared to finish the project under completely fantastic, inhuman conditions; and he became in his own way happy.

SLEs are inquisitive people. They are generally clear, consistent and systematic in their actions. They value competency and have an appreciation for method, viewing these things as vehicles through which strength, power and influence are demonstrated, values that SLEs consider important.
While SLEs see logical systems and structured views as necessary in life, they will often view said systems and views as changeable or expendable. Their use of Ti is flexible. They tend to gather - either legitimately or illegitimately - and retain information which they deem useful in attaining their goals.
SLEs come to their own conclusions about the world, although they tend towards simple generalizations. Because the SLE's ideas are influenced by their own agenda, they can be more subjective than they claim to be; they are skilled at using objective truths to help them achieve their goals. It can be very difficult to argue with an SLE; rarely will they submit to another's logic, since they believe that their own logic is so well developed. SLEs will often refuse to take others' advice - even to their own detriment - as they can have difficulty seeing viewpoints that differ from their own (though this may also be a matter of pride). They also have the tendency to compare others' plans to their own, and because of their confidence, will often consider them inferior or offer critique from their own point of view.

Introverted Thinking as (3rd) Role function 

(ESI - ISFj / EII - INFj) "The individual needs to put on a Role when externally pressured to, and your leading and creative functions don't suffice."

The individual is able to talk about things from a dispassionate academic or theoretical point of view for brief periods of time, but seems overly bookish when doing so and tends to grows tense. When feeling obliged to justify logically a personal decision taken for reasons determined by , the individual attempts to do so but grows quickly annoyed especially if the inconsistency in the logical argument is pointed out. He then either explains the ethical motivation or avoids the issue altogether. 

EII (FIlatova/Reinin)

EII thinks over all his actions beforehand, defining concrete goals or imperatives that are of primary importance to reach. This approach does not always succeed due to his emotionalism which frequently pushes or pulls him away from the original direction he planned to follow. Nevertheless he tries to organize his activity into a specific system, bring about order, which requires vast efforts from him.
The normative nature of this function in EII is especially clearly seen in how ardently this sociotype abides by the laws and regulations. He follows exactly the official norms and regulations that are endorsed in his society.
Trying to work as conscientiously as possible, EII doesn't always do so effectively. Thus he wastes much of his time in an unproductive fashion. He sometimes compensates for this by working from dawn to dawn. He finds it difficult to bind his workday within a reasonable framework: there always seems to be something that is unfinished. Frequently, he wants to realize himself in that which doesn't work out for him. As a consequence of his efforts at self-improvement, he sometimes wholly devotes himself to work, which contradicts his nature, but the feeling of responsibility exceeds his other needs. Subordinate themselves to a system of order so long as not they’re not forced. Does not develop interest in theories of an abstract nature. Not always capable of organizing work efficiently, spends much time ineffectively spending resources, capable of overworking in order to make up for this.

My understanding, Fear to understand all and everything. Therefore a Dostoyevsky’s explanations sometimes seem vague, confusing to the representatives of the other types. A Dostoevsky may go to one of the two extremes here: on the one hand there is a propensity to mysticism, on the other hand there is an unusual trust in statistics and evidences. Because of the subconscious fear to understand everything, this type often tries to explain the unknown by the obscure. People of this type are very practical people, but they are not very good at explaining things, obviously it is not their strongest side.
EIIs are not easily able to abstract themselves from the human dimension and apply "cold" logic. When they try to do this, they easily become unsure if their reasoning is correct.
EIIs feel that not everything can be classified under the system since everything has its unique individual attributes.

ESI (FIlatova/Reinin)

At the beginning of any task or project, ESI attentively collects and prepares the necessary material, carefully thinks things over everything, but afterwards she takes action energetically and decisively. However, the weakness of this function is exhibited by the fact that this preparatory period consumes huge investments of her time and energy. She don't naturally, quickly, nor easily make rational decisions. She also finds it difficult to objectively prioritize, to distinguish primary from the secondary: she often does everything at once, tries to work as much as possible, and doesn't always correlate her capabilities to her plans. Thus it often happens that she overloads and exhausts herself by work, while not achieving as much as she could have achieved. Abstract theories are only dealt with, with difficulty. Conscientious, she nevertheless does not know how to make her work technologically efficient or effective. She attains successes exclusively due to her perseverance with great expenditures of time and resources.

My understanding, Here is the fear to understand everything. Therefore sometimes a Dreiser's explanations seem short and vague to other people. This type would rather talk about facts than explain things. She tends to avoid situations when it is necessary to explain things. “Why explain things that exist and I can see them with my own eyes. I want to know, it is not necessary to explain anything”. A Dreiser often runs into explanations, which he does not see as true. Never mind explanations being absolutely logical – it is just not so. A Dreiser clearly perceives the actual state of affairs irrespective of the fact how and who interprets them. They do not like to talk through the issues and work on relationships.

Introverted Thinking as (4th) Vulnerable function

(SEE - ESFp / IEE - ENFp) "The painful point of least resistance and source of inability."

This makes them highly inconsistent and they try to avoid classifications and systems to a great length, and logical systems is their weak spot. The individual has a tendency to either completely reject or completely embrace a source of theoretical knowledge, but does not like to reveal the source or his adherence to it.

He prefers to limit the number of theoretical categories he works with and tends to see new terminology, systems, and rules as being arbitrary and unnecessary until he at last discovers their necessity for himself through extensive personal experience.

He may be able to express his views clearly when given the time, but he is not prepared to deal with people who challenge his views and draw him into logical arguments and disputes. For this reason, he is reluctant to publicize new determinations and opinions until he is absolutely sure that they are right and that he can support them thoroughly to anyone who challenges them.

IEE (Filatova)

Represents “working activity” and always supposes a definite organization. By this is meant punctuality, the function of responsibilities, instruction, regulation, the hierarchy of subordination, accountability… And these are all which serve to drive the IEE away – any weighty framework that dictates to her “to fulfill responsibilities.” Her creativity sees nothing as predetermined. Therefore it is especially important that she find work in which her gifts are revealed.
The nontrivial course of thoughts characteristic for many representatives of this psycho-type may lead them to realize themselves in scientific research work, where with ease they propose unexpected views on problems. However, they poorly respond to manual labor and logical analysis. Anything that requires they be thorough and systematic in their investigations will lead them to quickly tire. They prefer to hand these aspects of scientific work to others and instead assume the role of “generator of ideas.” However, when they fail to find creative work, in which something new can always be seen, their previously indefatigable inquisitiveness severely weakens.
After having tried 10 – 15 different specialties she may prove to be without anything, to have attained nothing in life, the entirety of her talent gone unrealized. After completing necessary preparations in a new project, if she sees something, which she finds more attractive, she may throw away everything. She prefers not to plan, but to improvise; it is dangerous to rely on her business qualities for she can get caught up in the moment.
She doesn’t respond well to templates and standards. IEE recognizes no formal subordination, feels no piety towards authorities; this may lead to trouble. The observations of authorities, especially if they, in her opinion, are wrong, are answered to sharply disregarding of who they are. It is therefore understandable that she is not at place in conditions subordinate to strict authority.
Regime, duty, regulations, accountability, all disarm her. Finds it difficult to be inscribed in any framework. Works exclusively based on her mood, is better able to focus on ‘big picture’ work than to be occupied by thorough study.

IEEs tend to have a difficult time describing a concept or system in a manner in which the essential facts are all that is needed to understand or describe it. The IEE's focus in describing a concept or system is in how they themselves came to understand and see what they are describing. If an IEE is asked to describe or explain something, their natural tendency is to describe the pieces of the concept, system or idea that are related to the subject as a foundation before explaining the actual concept itself. The IEE will often describe details or aspects of a system that are unnecessary to the understanding of the system's properties, but the IEE views these details as essential functions of a sequential system (as opposed to describing the concept or system and only the concept or system as an independent entity). In other words, even if a detail is deemed outside of the IEE as extraneous, the IEE that is describing it will see it as a vital and significant part of a chain in order to paint the full, "proper" picture of the system the IEE wants to describe. An IEE will tend to start off explanations with a tremendous amount of detail, energy and patience and will move towards a more general explanation as they tire out (if they tire out). If something in the IEE's chain is broken or questioned, the description (in the IEE's mind) halts or falls apart.
When an IEE understands a logical concept or system, they are much better at describing anecdotal experiences with the concept or system that help to illustrate the concept or system. They would prefer to do this rather than describing the concept or system as described in the previous paragraph -- describe the essential facts of a concept or system.
IEEs will demonstrate inconsistent behavioral patterns to the objective, outside world. But to the IEE, these behavioral patterns are as a result of a relativist view of how they make their decisions. For example, an IEE might be steadfastly against going to a particular branch of a bank to deposit a check that is easily accessible and only 2 miles away, but is perfectly content going to a different branch of the same bank that is 25 miles away and requires a roundabout route to get there. To the outside world this would not make sense; why not just go to the branch that is easier to access that can handle the same function? But to the IEE, this does not matter. Something at the closer branch bothers the IEE enough to justify going to the further one. Maybe a particular person works there that the IEE wants to avoid, maybe one time the IEE did something embarrassing while at the closer branch and they are embarrassed to show their face again. Regardless of the reason, the IEE will justify circumstances to dictate the decisions they make in their behavioral patterns.

SEE (Filatova)

The weakness of this function is developed in the fact that activities for the SEE frequently carry a chaotic nature; in his behavior there is no systematic pattern of character.
Even if SEE possesses a heavy stock of knowledge, he is not always able to sufficiently make use of it; his emotionalism frequently re-weighs logic. His erudition manifests itself in sudden flashes but he never keeps on one topic for long. An extroverted sensory type, his need for external activity frequently manifests itself in uncontrollable motor activity. Thus he may be prone to acting before thinking.
Understanding that logic is not his strongest quality, SEE compensates for this in his business activities by placing a greater role in his personal contacts and connections. He attempts to work out the definite stereotypes of behaviour in different situations so as to not be caught unprepared.
For SEE it is very important that the result of his work be visible and tangible. He wishes to obtain a return for his efforts. This may be exemplified through community acknowledgement (i.e. social status) and/or material evidence of acknowledgment (i.e. apartment, car, the latest gadget, the most up-to-date, most elegant, prestigious fashions…)
System, structure, objective laws – these are areas in which the SEE struggles. Finds it difficult to think deeply and thoroughly about a problem. Being very energetic, now and then acts in a chaotic, confused manner.

The SEE hates when other people infer or remind him that he's not doing what he "should be doing." This is in complete opposite to his preference of following his whims and doing what he wants when he wants it, with as little structure as possible.
They have trouble focusing on systematic decision making, sometimes leading to occasional large mistakes (e.g. an unnecessary, expensive purchase) that was not thought through. Such mistakes lead to shame, guilt, and disappointment within the SEE, although he does not broadcast these sentiments to many. SEE doesn't like having to weight out pros and cons or make the "right" or "proper" decision.
In regards to unsubstantiated, theoretical knowledge, the SEE can either accept the unproven parts in good faith, or he'll completely reject it as foolish, unnecessary, and unimportant.
The SEE can be afraid to make discussion about fields heavy in systematic knowledge, doubting his ability to convey such thoughts in a clear, composed, and valued manner.

Introverted Thinking as (5th) Suggestive function

(ESE - ESFj/ EIE - ENFj) "The individual knows it needs something but is continually unsure about exactly what. Source of subconscious fullfilment."

Since it’s their dual-seeking functions, they want to surround themselves with people can that help them with a clear and concise system, that they can apply their Fe in. They highly prefer to live inside a system, but has big problems providing this themselves.The individual has great admiration for people with well-developed systems of views. He especially likes clear and concise explanations of concepts, rather than a lot of background information about them that is not directly pertinent. He wants his actions to make sense, and thus needs external assurance that the conceptual understanding behind them is correct. If he cannot find a source of certainty, he may become flustered and unable to act rationally at all.

Deliberately searches for a place where everything is clear and avoids those places where something remains unclear, primarily from the point of view of common sense. Needs people who know how to make complicated things more understandable and becomes attached to such people. If you tell him that something is going to be difficult to understand, then he won't even make attempts. If you tell him that it will be easy to understand, he will become inspired by this. Very suggestible by understanding of other people and, in general, by any logic, thus can easily believe in the most bizarre and unrealistic things, very easy to convince. Loves to learn, but to those courses where everything is explained in meticulous detail. Lectures where instructor simply gives terms and facts repel him, as each term must be explained to him in detail. Can easily get tricked because of this suggestibility through logic. Wherever someone gives them explanations so that everything is simple and clear, they will favor such place. In situations where he doesn't understand something, may pretend to be stupid, uninterested, or bored. Becomes angry with those who know but refuse to explain what it is not clear to him; believes that they are mocking him. The best environment for him is where everything is 100% understandable.

ESE (Reinin/Golihov)

“I want to understand everything! Explain things to me. Please do explain! I am not interested if I do not understand. A good place is where understand everything". Perhaps the two types – a Hugo and a Hamlet – are the most frequent attendants of all kinds of lectures, meetings, conferences, discussions and debates. It is important for them that that the event is well structured, the lecturer explains and clarifies everything carefully. Sometimes in a large audience one can see people in a sort of light trance (euphoria) – just because they feel they understand everything perfectly. The fact that someone explains 'how it should be' is comforting! I feel good in a place where things have an explanation, and I get help with understanding things. A collision of concepts is a problem, though. Once a Hugo gets a clear picture of something it would be hard to apprehend a conflicting concept. However, this collision is not so terrible because people of this type do not pay attention to the basis of their understanding as a rule. Their logic of reasoning is aesthetic rather than scientific.
In the area of the fourth function quickly nothing may be altered too soon. This area is not creative. Programs run it, our own programs as well as other people's programs – our parents', our teachers'. These programs may conflict with one other. Sometimes we don’t see any logic in our own thoughts and deeds, let alone other's! People usually do not agree with the logic of another type.
Hugo and Hamlet have random logic. They chose random starting points for their reasoning. Hugo does this quite often. A Hugo may receive an infusion because the formal logic of an explanation seems reasonable, he may accept things with which he does not agree with normally. People of this type should be aware of this trait and be more discerning when things are explained to them.

The ESE often feels like he wants to go in many different directions at once, and hence desperately needs someone to cut out all the irrelevancies and select the proper course of action, rather than providing even more "helpful" information that is of ambiguous relevance to the situation. The ESE will greatly admire people who can analyze everyday situations and put them in context, as well as introduce them to exciting new concepts or "research". The ESE wants his actions to make sense, but is almost always too caught up in his emotions to make very methodical, introspective, and impersonal judgments. If he cannot find a source of certainty, he may become insecure and unable to act rationally. The ESE loves to learn about new things, and is especially intrigued when the teacher appears confident and knowledgeable. Man consciously looking for a place where everything is clear and it avoids those where something remains unclear, complicated, first of all from the point of view of common sense. It needs people who are able to clearly explain complex things, often tied to them for that reason. If you tell him that something would be difficult to understand that he will not try to figure it out, just run away. If you say it's easy, and it's clear it will be easy, because it is inspired by this. Very instill an understanding of other people and in general any logic, therefore, can easily believe in the strangest and unrealistic things, them it is easy to convince. They love to go to learn, but those courses where in detail and clearly, all meticulously explained. Lectures, which just give the terms and facts, they fear, because each of them has to be meticulously explained to them first. There may be deceived by fraudsters because of the suggestibility of their logic, it is necessary to remember it always. Someone must constantly explain to them that everything is simple and clear, then seat it will sound good. If you leave a situation where it is unclear that it is impossible, you can pretend to be a fool, or to pretend that it's not interesting, boring. Angry at the people who know but refuse to explain what is not clear to him, he said that they thus scoff at him. The best habitat - primarily on 100% understandable and predictable.

EIE (Reinin/Golihov)

My understanding, explanations, concepts, theories, hierarchy of conceptions about what is near or far, higher or lower; my level of education, my school, my understanding of the world, the system of my conceptions and thoughts; principles for evaluating a place. A good place is where I understand everything. The EIE may accept something simply because it sounds logical. EIE and ESE - these are the two types who enjoy most of all attending lectures, meetings, discussions, etc. (see description of a Hugo). The main thing for them is the presence of a structure, so that they understand what’s going on. Hamlet accepts other people’s explanations of how something works and what is the right way. A good place - is the place where everything is explicitly explained and crystal clear, where things have been thoroughly explained to me in a way that I have understood. A Hamlet is thus open to outside influences through explanation. 

EIEs admire people whose thinking is clear-cut, unambiguous, and stalwart, who reduce the myriad of possibilities down to one single option. This is something they are almost completely unable to do on their own (they easily doubt their ability to choose right), but have a deep need for in other people.
In conversation EIEs tend to go off on tangents when something is mentioned that triggers an emotional response, and they often need to be reminded of the subject matter or purpose of the discussion.
EIEs love to hear about information that their friends know. Talking about academic subjects, music, and movies expands the horizons of the EIE and gives them direction. The EIE is happy to simply be a part of the discussion of various subjects, while providing emotional input himself. The information just gives them a new reason to see their friends, and more things to talk about with them.
EIEs are happy to let someone else organize their schedule and keep track of their engagements and things to do.

Introverted Thinking as (6th) Mobilizing/Activating function

(SEI - ISFp / IEI - INFp) "Hidden Agenda - strong interest in getting more information from its elements / triggered by the external"

The individual seeks clarity in his system of beliefs and understanding and enjoys entertaining new concepts and being included in philosophical discussions where new concepts and systems of thought are introduced. He is uncertain of the logical clarity backing his actions, and thus seeks external assistance in attaining a degree of reasonable competence in this realm. Structure is sought as more of a means to an end, a background guide to facilitate the growth of the individual's main goal.

As a mobilizing function, for INFps and ISFps, Ti is fairly weak but highly valued. For INFps, it makes them highly ideological, rigidly following an ideology, paying very much attention to be consistent in this, not wanting to fault in any way. Their lack of skill in it can often make them unable to see flaws in it. For ISFps, it works in a similar way, but is geared towards how to shape reality rather than an abstract, Utopian ideology.

It is very important for such person to understand everything. If you inquire about some difficult question from him, you may hear that he understands it, but only in a very peculiar way. If he is unable to understand something, it lowers his self-esteem, thus he doesn't like to admit that he hasn't understood something. He enjoys being praised for his logic, likes to boast that he has thought up of something himself. Often likes to refer to some stories from everyday life, because nobody would think of checking their validity. In general, likes to make references to somebody else as a way of protecting his arguments (since then the responsibility for objectivity is passed on to this person). Realizes himself in areas that do not require factual confirmation. In passive self-defense he will admit to not understanding something, call himself stupid, or complain that no one understands him. In active self-defense he will argue that he understands everything correctly. His logic is the logic of common sense and everyday life, so it is difficult to argue with it. Everything that comes into his life must be understood and comprehended. And he, coming into other people's lives, hopes to be understood by them. Afraid to be mistaken in his understanding of something, but on occasion can very easily change his explanation, but so that it is not very conspicuous ("sure crocodiles can fly, but very, very close to the ground"). Worries often and tries to clarify matters of mutual understanding with others, "you did not understand me, I hoped it would be better this way". Wants to be appreciated for his sincerity.

IEI (Stratiyevskaya)

IEIs seek help understanding and perceiving objective measurements and correlations between data within a system, but past a certain point such judgment is seen as overkill. IEIs do not tend to store such information themselves, but they appreciate this trait in others. They may doubt their objectivity in such areas of understanding, and desire a partner who is strong and responsive in this function to ensure certainty.
They have a secret desire to truly understand things, but will fall short without an outer reference to keep them on the same page. Without a partner who can provide motivation and logical structural reference, they may slide off the edge of the map, lost in their dreams and out of touch with reality.
IEIs are aware of their own disorganization with logical constructs and can sometimes feel as though they do not know what to do about it. Sometimes a simple routine way of categorizing ideas and their logical correlations can do wonders for IEIs, as long as they still feel independent and free to explore the subject matter creatively.
The IEI is very much activated by possibilities of gathering information which he views as important. Despise his apparent absent-mindedness, he is sufficiently observant and with ease finds those who can tell him something interesting. By information gathering the IEI renders an especially valuable service to his dual the SLE, for whom "knowledge" is another form of strength and protection. Just as the SLE, the IEI considers that information is valuable and that learning and acquiring new knowledge is very beneficial.
The IEI is very adept at collecting and reviewing information. He gathers it from many sources - most comprehensive and most reliable. The selection of information and its analysis is carried out by him very thoroughly: the most valuable information the IEI retains for himself and shares with people who are dear to him.
The IEI won't allow anyone else to hide things from him, moreover, he prompts people naturally and without constraint. It is sufficient for him to want to know - and he will learn everything that is of interest to him. IEI's curiosity knows no boundaries, and at times it's not even bounded by decency. With an innocent look the IEI can ask rather tactless questions (of type: "And who has helped you with getting accepted?"), and with this he is fully confident that he will receive a response. It is very difficult to hide anything from the IEI, but it is even more difficult to obtain from him information that he doesn't want to share, that has the potential of being harmful.
The IEI greatly dislikes being misinformed or informed untimely, although he himself may do both things. The IEI does not forgive craftiness and treachery exercised in such a manner, and it is precisely in such situations that it is possible to turn him into one's enemy (and this is very dangerous!): when the IEI understands that someone has fooled him, that someone is trying to outsmart him and play him, IEI's quadral complex of not being put into a disadvantage leads him to worsen his relations with the offender.
For the IEI it is difficult to be logically consistent, though he doesn't particularly strive for this. He can easily contradict himself however many times, while believing that he's reasoning in a sufficiently logical and astute manner.
In order to logically out-argue the IEI, one doesn't need to use particularly weighty arguments. The IEI wins in debates not by logic but by ethics. And out-arguing him is extremely difficult. He is too adept at derailing arguments, directing them aside to irrelevant issues, turning things personal and starting to sort out relations.**
[**Editor's note: This tactic is most commonly employed by IEIs of ethical subtype - at some point in the argument they may start to comment about the other person's personal qualities, their social standing in a group, their relationships with others, turning the argument from logical to personal basis. This tactic is also used by other ethical irrationals of ethical subtypes, such as Fi-SEE, who use their strong ethical creative function to insert "personal retorts" and "cover up" their disinclination to give logical explanations.]
The IEI experiences difficulty with tracing the full sequential course of logical reasoning – it is hard for a person of this type to grasp an expanded and extensive logical analysis in its entirety. The IEI much readily receives and understands short purposeful logical statements provided by his dual, the SLE, who is capable of explaining the most difficult concepts in the most simple and easily accessible terms, and of finding the most convincing arguments and putting them in such order that would make them convincing to another person. Forms of explanations of other logical types don't suit the IEI.** They seem either by too needlessly entangled and complicated, or too removed and unrelated to the matter at hand (which greatly irritates him). SLE's logic, in this respect, is the most optimal for him and most convincing.
[**Editor's note: This is not completely true, as IEIs are also receptive to the logical explanations delivered by LIIs, though these explanations, while being informative and intellectually enriching, don't mobilize the IEI as does SLE's argumentation.]
Speaking on any topic, the IEI does not pretend to objectivity of his own opinion. For him assessing how much his own opinion correlates with opinions of people around him is more important.**
[**Editor's note: This applies to all Subjectivist types, who coordinate and compare individual views.]
The IEI loves to discuss and think about detached and distant themes, but usually does not consider himself to be a "deep" philosopher: he does this "under the right mood" and for his own enjoyment and not for a thorough in depth study.
Memorizing study material and figuring out logical concepts for the IEI is rather difficult. Attempt to give logical definition to his own words ... it's better not to ask him to do this.
Delivering lectures on scientific and technical subjects are also not IEI's cup of tea. If Esenin needs to deliver a research report, read a lecture, or pass examination on theoretical and technical disciplines, he always tries to use humor to cover up for his helplessness. (Though this doesn't always save him. For example: during a pregraduate examination in electronics, a student-Esenin, after instructor gave him a transistor, imprudently exclaimed: "Wow, look at these wires! They are like antennae of ants!") Rarely does one find representatives of this type teaching theoretical disciplines. (Perhaps only at the most basic level, for the children in starting classes.)**
[**Editor's note: This is an untrue stereotype. Some IEIs do go on to receive graduate degrees in physical sciences, as well as mathematics, philosophy, computer science, etc. and sometimes work in such fields on the level of a tenured professor. However, the incidence of this is perhaps lower than for types such as ILE.]

SEI (Stratiyevskaya)

SEIs seek clarity in their system of beliefs and understanding. This can lead to them compulsively questioning or simply having a thirst for gaining knowledge. They are able to read much information on subjects relating to their daily lives, and if questioned on why they read, they would say something akin to "knowledge is power". With this knowledge, the SEI is able to build/edit his/her personal world.
SEIs enjoy entertaining new concepts and being included in philosophical discussions where new concepts and systems of thought are introduced and developed. SEIs are aware that they are somehow limited in discovering knowledge on their own, so they search for catalysts to help them gain it. Finding these modes of learning and communication clarify what the SEI believes in, and fulfills their inner desire.
The ISFp with pleasure takes up work that to him seems logically sound and logically specific, for which he/she has sufficient theoretical preparation and understanding.
The credibility of sources of information is very important for the ISFp. For example, if some logical discrepancy is found in a source the ISFp used as a reference, the ISFp won't calm down until he finds some explanation for this, or until he figures out how important and fundamental this illogicality is, how it will influence the general course and essence of his work.
If the ISFp has some doubts about the accuracy and authenticity of the information, he will prepare the theoretical material for himself, independently, and spend both time and money on this. For example, one student of this type purchased an electronic translator for herself which she used to translate all of the necessary information that was published in a foreign language instead of using already translated versions which she found to be inaccurate.
The ISFp scrupulously gathers all the material and information which he considers to be important to himself, thoroughly analyzes it, thinks it over. The ISFp is exceptionally observant of details and minor facts. "I immediately suspected something is wrong when my husband sat down to read the newspaper and immediately threw it aside. This has never happened before! That he would put down the newspaper and didn't read it cover to cover."
Exceptional power of observation and the ability to deeply analyze obtained information make it possible for ISFps to show themselves magnificently well in many professional fields. (For example, they may succeed in such professions as intelligence officer, inspector, doctor, actor, movie director, and so on.)
The ISFp is greatly interested in the most promising scientific methods. He tries to be up to date with the latest developments, renovates his computer with the newest programs and updates.
The ISFp can be convinced only by credible, reliable facts and by logically sequential and coherent arguments. It is also interesting for the SEI to unearth and observe some logical regularities or laws in some difficult to explain phenomena.
Luckily for the ISFp they have such a dual as the ENTp who is capable of calculating and thinking up that which still does not exist nature, the most daring fantasy, the most daring concept. Based on calculations and the logical computations of the ENTp the most daring dream seems to be close and easily obtainable in reality, and the ISFp (with his entire sober realism) with pleasure participates in the most fantastical projects of the ENTp, with readiness offering his help and support in the realization of his dual's most daring undertakings.

Introverted Thinking as (7th) Ignoring function

(LIE ENTj / LSE - ESTj) "Point of modest success due to strength of evaluation, but doing barely anything unless there is a real need."

The individual understands easily, but is largely indifferent to, discussions that focus on the internal logic of ideas and systems. The individual perceives such logical systems as largely worthless to his goals and finds them completely uninteresting and unproductive. For ESTjs and ENTjs, Ti is the opposite of who they are. They very much prefer to focus on the accuracy of something, the pragmatic approach of whether it works or not, than to focus on the consistency and systematisation of it. Incoming information are however checked through this function, and even though their biggest problem with something is when it’s faulty in the realm of Te, they notice it in Ti as well.

LIE (Stratiyevskaya)

LIEs understand easily, but are largely indifferent to, discussions that focus on the internal logic of ideas and systems. They perceive such logical systems as largely worthless to their goals and find them completely uninteresting and unproductive.
LIEs are confident in spotting internal logical contradictions in ideas and arguments proposed by others, and in pointing them out; however, they are more likely to point out how such ideas and arguments do not hold if checked against external evidence. They see the internal consistency of a case as of lesser importance than the accuracy of the facts presented with that case.
Likewise, LIEs are far more likely to make a case by arguing facts that support them, rather than how it fits logically from a system or assumptions.

This function supplements the logical program of the LIE, prepares theoretical base for him, collection and information processing are accomplished. His consistency and authenticity are checked.
The LIE it is possible to convince only by facts and logically irreproachable concepts. Subconsiously he always notes for himself all logical discrepancies and actual nonconformities in any thought expressed to him, in any theory proposed to him. He possesses excellent memory, he easily memorizes new information, trying to immediately systematize it.
Information he collects very thoroughly, as far as possible from very authoritative sources. For the LIE it is very important precisely the authenticity of information sources. As a rule, he rests only on those facts, of authenticity of which he is personally convinced. Therefore to him, it is always unpleasant to be disappointed in the information source: for the LIE this is just as disappointment in the friendship - it was entrusted, and they brought it[ --]
The collection of information in LIEs is complicated by the fact that they cannot allow themselves to too extend this process in the time: indeed so matter itself already can become late. Undertaking new big deal, he always tries to obtain the precisely comprehensive information: on the basis of the interests of matter and feeling of responsibility before its command, it does not make possible for himself to lightly relate to this question. Gathering information, the LIE tries to be maximally foresighted and farsighted - it compulsorily should consider possible changes and changes of the conditions in the future. (for example: checking the article of expenditure, he, as a rule, considers his dependence on some unforeseen circumstances: a possible increase in the prices, inflation, increase in the taxes, increase in the tariffs on the services, connected with the maintenance and the insurance. I.e., the collection of information is achieved "on application" his subsequent mental function - "intuition of possibilities".)
It is characteristic of the LIE to notice any distortion of information known to him. He dislikes greatly, when people "distort" facts and thus they distort truth - this deeply agitates him. However relaxed he was, it would seem, any logical contradiction immediately pricks up his ears. LIE - fundamental enemy of manipulation with facts, even if this does not change the essence of concept. He won’t always easily agree to recognize that one and the same fact is the consequence of the most different reasons. And not because he has in principle difficultly understanding: accepting any theory, it is important for the LIE to be confident in his logical understanding.
In exactly the same manner, accepting any information, he must be confident, that it is not based at the manipulation of facts. (in connection with this, sometimes problems appear in the initial stage of the dualization of the LIE with ESI: in the ESI, as is known, there is manipulation ethics, and the ESI is sufficiently free with the facts - to one and the same fact, she can attach the opposite value, and she does not see a big sin in this. This circumstance will prick up ears of the LIE, until he understands that the ESI's logic is no more than a form of persuasion, which is exactly calculated for him, the LIE).
The LIE tries to construct all his actions on the basis of repeatedly checked personal experience (his technological procedures he develops also on the basis of repeated experiments. Therefore any criticism of his own tested procedures, he receives very painfully.)
In the region of scientific experiments the LIEs very boldly make their personal experience, and, beginning from the earliest childhood. [--] Greatly they love to develop, they dream to move apart the horizons of science. Greatly they are proud of their inventions, regardless of the fact how this affects those surrounding.
The theoretical logic of the LIE creates information base and it is the prerequisite of its subsequent mental function - the intuition of possibilities.

LSE (Stratiyevskaya)

LSEs may become interested in abstract concepts and don't generally have difficulty understanding them, but they are almost always more interested in the practical application. If a concept or idea has none, it is worthless. LSEs are more focused on what works in real life than on what seems to fit together logically.
Representatives of this type learn their entire life, and entire life the obtained knowledge is not sufficient for them, which they are never embarrassed to admit to, but this circumstance doesn't always find understanding among their colleagues and co-workers. "She has 15 years of teaching experience, and she comes to my lessons with a notebook to record everything in detail!.." (from impressions of representatives of this type).
No work experience, no professional achievements give ESTjs the confidence in the fact that they know sufficiently enough. Representatives of this type are often deprived of any professional ambitions and never suffer the absence of self-criticism. Whichever level of professionalism they reach, they never allow themselves to overestimate their own capabilities and approach any new assignment or work exceptionally seriously.
Starting some creative or scientific research work, they scrupulously and for a long time collect the needed material. (Sometimes this collection of the material lasts for the entirety of their career.) The depth of working through the preparatory material in case of LSEs can be completely staggering. (M. A. Bulgakov, who has never been in Jerusalem, described the topographic special features of this city with a striking accuracy - a fact that was recognized by many Israelis who are familiar with his creations.)
The erudition of the ESTj is worth much admiration! Independently of their main activities, their libraries often holds all kinds of possible reference books, dictionaries, catalogs, atlases, and encyclopedias.** (In library of one of the representatives of this type, who worked in development and design of toys, there were atlases with images of animals and all existing species on the earth, moreover, many of the specific animals had dedicated atlas books of their own.)
[**Translator's note: Perhaps not in modern times since much of the information can be found online, and there is no need to keep that many books around.]
The LSE is usually not troubled to admit of own incompetence, although this happens extremely rarely. Incompetence in a professional question for the ESTj is generally an exceptional phenomenon, but if this occurs it is often because the crucial information was for some reasons inaccessible to him.
Although it is precisely for a real LSE that no information is inaccessible. People of this type are ideally suitable for collecting secret and "almost inaccessible" information, they ideally correspond to the profession of the intelligence officer: exceptional power of observation in combination with the skill to analyze the obtained information (moreover, obtained along all possible and impossible channels), outstanding physical endurance, resoluteness, composure, maximum industriousness and irreproachable accuracy of work - here is a set of features that practically every of the representatives of this type is endowed with, due to which some of them turn into irreplaceable "soldiers of an invisible front".
Any obtained information, any bit of knowledge and data gives representatives of this type "information for reflection". The ESTj divides information sources into "authoritative" and "un-authoritative". The authoritative sources are accepted almost unconditionally, (although also not without a check), the second type of sources get checked and rechecked repeatedly by the LSE until the pass into the "authoritative" category.
The LSE trusts only that information which has been confirmed by facts and in which authenticity he has been personally and repeatedly convinced. The LSE accepts any new information very carefully, substantively, and fundamentally, trying to connect it with what he already knows. If he didn't thoroughly understand something, he is not troubled to ask again or to refine it. He tries to immediately sort out the received information "on the shelves". To the LSE it is always important to understand the subject matter not only in brief, but also in particular detail.
The ESTj can present the most complex almost inaccessible to understanding concept by most simple and intelligible means - a trait that helps the LSE reach excellent results in teaching and instructional work.
In other people the LSE greatly values the skill to clearly and consecutively explain themselves. To distract or mislead the LSE from his own thoughts is very difficult - when presenting anything, he never deviates from the topic at hand, and does not get distracted by any side-wise questions.
[**Translator's note: This is preconditioned by LSE's particular style of thinking, Dialectic-Algorithmic, which is dual to and most persuaded by the thinking style of Casual-Determinist types that lay out their perceptions, feelings, and thoughts in a consecutive and explicit manner.]
A persons's inability to clearly lay out their thoughts does not evoke LSE's sympathy. He does not like mentally disoriented, muddled, chaotic and mixed-up explanations. The LSE also does not like distortions and manipulations of facts. Moreover, such instances always greatly irritate him, especially when they concern his personal interests or the interest of his business.
The LSE doesn't understand speculative logic nor does he receive it well - he is not one of the people who can be convinced with a simple juggling of bogus facts**. The LSE agrees with another person's opinion if it doesn't contradict his own persuasions and values, if it has been proven by facts, in which he has been personally persuaded.
[**Translator's note: Unless this 'juggling' comes from his Te-creative supervisor type, the ILI, to which the LSE is susceptible.]

Introverted Thinking as (8th) Demonstrative function

(ILI - INTp / SLI - ISTp) "The individual confidently controls, evaluates and masters these aspects but uses them for mockery and rebel against them."

The individual often criticizes others' views from a logical standpoint, picking apart statements and postulates and showing that they are logically flawed. However, he does not choose to do this excessively and does not expect that reality can be accurately expressed in a neat logical systematic anyway. INTps and ISTps, are through their unconscious but strong Ti very consistent by nature, never having any problem with Ti-related topics. However, a too rigid structure that tends to be the result of relying on this function too much hinders their dominant function to do their job, and they therefore tend to skip over this function as far as possible.

ILI (Stratiyevskaya)

ILIs naturally possess a strong command of logical systems such as formal logic and mathematics, but may find them uninteresting. They also tend to be very skeptical of overly systematic explanations of real-world phenomena. While they readily acknowledge the utility of many proven systematic, mathematical, and scientific systems, they tend to criticize theories that describe an absolute reality or that do not have any empirical basis. The ILI vision of reality -- scientific, philosophical, or otherwise -- is a self-contained universe with too many processes and mysteries to count.
ILIs often reject absolutist explanations, constantly reevaluating their informational outlook (e.g. "this may change, but at the moment I am kind of inclined to think that droog is better than blinth, despite these probable alternatives").

In any situation, the INTp tries to appear objective. The quality of his he demonstrates with pleasure.
But acting in interests of "absolute objectivity", the ILI frequently falls into an awkward position: thinking about the absolute justice and fairness of his actions, he frequently forgets about their ethical aspect - "just and fair with respect to whom?"
In a debate or argument, the INTp often keeps a demonstrative neutrality, trying to not "support" either side too much. His own relations to any action the ILI expresses not as a specific personal opinion, but presents it as a kind of objective and correct evaluation. The ILI likes situating himself in the role of a judge. For him, it is characteristic not to simply voice his opinion or point of view, but namely to "carry out a judgement" or "assessment" for each question (even if he was only invited to discuss the question).
INTp's arguments are characterized by their accuracy, meticulousness, and a deep insight into the very essence of things. The lightness and simplicity of ILI's statements are breathtaking and evoke a feeling of admiration. To fall under ILI's profound disposition of spirit - is an enormous "intellectual enjoyment". This always forms the richest material for reflections. These are phrases and statements that one wishes to remember and repeat as one's own. When one listens to ILI's reasonings, there involuntarily appears a desire to walk after him step-by-step with a notepad and to write down each word.
The INTp prefers not to clutter up his memory by encyclopedic information, although among people of this type one can meet many exclusively erudite people. The ILI impresses primarily by the depth of his knowledge.
The INTp loves and knows how to learn, teaching himself new information consecutively and gradually, so that it wouldn't extend far beyond the framework of his observations: the ILI is primarily interested in links and information about already studied phenomena.
Learning new information the INTp tries to immediately interconnect it into the already existing system of knowledge in his mind. Any information that contradicts already formed systems and notions, or destroys them, the ILI treats with a lot of criticism.
The INTp is not characterized by blind admiration of authorities. Making a reference to a source, he supports his statement by a precise and appropriate quotation, always clarifying what relevant it has to his discourse.
The INTp frequently supports his reasoning with instructive parables. Sometimes the parable is presented in place of reasons, so that the listener is left to make guesses in relevance to what the ILI said this. In actuality, ILI's frequently "hide" and "cover" themselves by these parables, especially when they are attempting to discuss something that poorly yields to their understanding, as, for example, the aspect of the ethics of emotion or ethics of relations (Fe and Fi).
The INTp does not see anything wrong with discussing everything simultaneously. He is ready to catch on to any theme in a conversation, freely switching from one topic to another. This occurs not because it is difficult for him to concentrate on something - these are natural dynamics of his intellect, that is subconsiously oriented at weak function with analogous aspect (Ti) of his dual, ESFp "Caesar", who unnoticeably to himself or herself jumps from one question to another. Balzac each new theme intertwines in the common course of his reasonings so that the entirety of logical connection in this case is not disrupted.

SLI (Stratiyevskaya)

SLIs like to philosophize and analyze life, but they use logical categories situationally rather than searching for a single cohesive structure for understanding the world. There are always unknown variables and a whole realm of inner experience that they feel is hard to classify, but must simply be experienced for what it is. They are typically skeptical of established social rules and, although understood, they prefer to break away from such formal standards, such as traditional greetings and handshakes. SLIs will keep to themselves unless approached directly. They have a strong sense of individuality in their reasoning and do not like having it challenged. SLIs are often pessimistic about what other people believe is true if these beliefs counter their own understanding, and will defend what they feel is correct if someone tries to discount them. However, getting someone to understand their logic is not a serious priority.
SLIs at times may play skilfully with categories and formal logical arguments, but they do not usually take themselves too seriously. However, they consistently label and classify the things and people around them - their understanding of the world is important. They become easily annoyed with people who emphasize theory and generalizations instead of solid factual knowledge.

In situations of collisions of opinions it is very important for the SLI to have the last word. It is very important that his point of view is acknowledged. (aspects of "volitional sensing" and "logic of relationships" are sometimes set in operation simultaneously, since they are located in same block) Often the SLI argues not out of consideration of searching for truth, but of the tendency to impose his point of view, or out of a desire to show himself to not be more foolish than others. As a general rule, the less intelligent the SLI - the greater self-assurance he demonstrates in a conflict.
It may happen that the SLI uses clearly inadmissible methods in a dispute: he may refer to some little-known, possibly fictitious authorities, or cite some doubtful facts from questionable sources. And it is characteristic of the SLI to always insist on the incontestability of his “reason”.
Arguing with an SLI doesn't always give intellectual enjoyment to his conversation partners. In view of SLI's own weak intuition, he, as a rule, does not voice his own original thoughts on the topic. Therefore, the entire conversation is often reduced to sometimes inappropriate quoting, which only leads away from the topic at hand; furthermore, feeling like he is losing the initiative in an argument, the SLI begins to either pressure others, or gets nervous and irritated - either reaction is rather unpleasant to observe.
The SLI won't miss a chance to demonstrate his knowledge in the most varied subjects, moreover, he doesn't feel like he needs to preliminary prepare for this. His interests are actually quite extensive, but due to this broadness the SLI often has only superficial knowledge of many things. Therefore, each time when the SLI is allowed an opportunity to show he is an expert on a subject, he will take this opportunity without a moment's hesitation and without considering the sense in doing so (according to the principle: “What I see, I speak about.”) The absurdity of his own statements at times does not completely confound and confuse him: the main thing for the SLI in this situation is to produce the impression of an “interesting” collocutor. This impression, first of all, is calculated for its dual the ENFp, who usually receives and treats a person how they present themselves.
Demonstrative argumentation is important to the SLI also because it implies a two-fold psychological sense. From one end - this is the substance of his reasoning, which as it seems he doesn't always heed himself; from another end - there is the sly and significant irony, which he expresses at this moment by his look - and slightly suppressed smile, which has no relation to the essence of his arguments.
It is precisely this important irony that is the main component of SLI’s ethical game. It transports the listener to a completely different plane of relations, making the listener perceive SLI's logical reasonings as only a background, or as occasion for drawing attention. The IEE immediately understands this clearly: with his splendid ethical intuition, the IEE understands that the point of the conversation is not the matter that was discussed; for the SLI this is only an excuse to have some personal contact and a method to draw attention to himself and to hold it.
On the background of such "logic" the IEE feels reassured that he can openly speak on any topic, and not risk being outdone or exposed on logical contradictions. The IEE recognizes that none will carefully listen to the logical meaning here, since this is a different type of game to which logic has no relation.
The demonstrative logic of SLI is an important component of his “ethical game,” in the process of which occurs his dualization with the IEE. By this we can explain SLI’s striving to produce a favorable impression on the aspect of logic. To SLI it is very important to never "lose face" and lose his prestige before an audience, since the IEE does not sympathize with people who have lost. Furthermore, the SLI, being subconsciously oriented at surface and changeable interest levels of the IEE, knows how difficult it is to get IEE’s attention and how difficult it will be to keep it.
And nevertheless, it would be erroneous to assert that the demonstrative reasonableness of the SLI is always and in every case a kind of posing and a trick. Certainly not! There are indeed some aspects, which actually occupy their attention. And analyzing them, the SLI no longer poses demonstratively. This goes for the topics of depictive art, for example, where almost no one can compare with SLIs in the skill to give the comparative analysis of color range or the composition of one or another artist.
The characteristics of sensations is the richest topic for SLI’s logic. The SLI can perceive deepest philosophical sense in a composition of an arrangement of color and tones. For example, any of Andrey Tarkovsky's films in the aesthetical plan is a model of SLI philosophy. Here is the strictly symmetrical construction of sequence, and its coordination in the form of triptych (three-part composition), and the interplay of colors and tones, and the game of different flat planes; here are the spacial and texture effects - that one can almost feel them by touch; here is the game of lights and shadows, and the game of sounds - the symbolism of sound, the symbolism of sensations. And this entire sensory symbolism is full of deep content and philosophical sense. Expressed through these sensory symbols are the deepest social, psychological, ethical and philosophical aspects which are then examined.
With the aid of logical symbols, the SLI expresses the world of his finest sensations and the state of his deepest experiences. This “sensory symbolism,” in turn, fills SLI's subjective sensations with value and sense, and makes them accessible to the understanding of people who surround the SLI.


Thank you for reading. This post is subject to continuous updates. Translated version to portuguese coming soon. Feel free to comment your opinion and suggestions. 



Just as Darwin might possibly represent the normal extraverted thinking type, so we might point to Kant as a counterexample of the normal introverted thinking type. The former speaks with facts; the latter appeals to the subjective factor. Darwin ranges over the wide fields of objective facts, while Kant restricts himself to a critique of knowledge in general. But suppose a Cuvier be contrasted with a Nietzsche: the antithesis becomes even sharper.

The introverted thinking type is characterized by a priority of the thinking I have just described. Like his extraverted parallel, he is decisively influenced by ideas; these, however, have their origin, not in the objective data but in the subjective foundation. Like the extravert, he too will follow his ideas, but in the reverse direction: inwardly not outwardly. Intensity is his aim, not extensity. In these fundamental characters he differs markedly, indeed quite unmistakably from his extraverted parallel. Like every introverted type, he is almost completely lacking in that which distinguishes his counter type, namely, the intensive relatedness to the object. In the case of a human object, the man has a distinct feeling that he matters only in a negative way, i.e., in milder instances he is merely conscious of being superfluous, but with a more extreme type he feels himself warded off as something definitely disturbing. This negative relation to the object—indifference, and even aversion—characterizes every introvert; it also makes a description of the introverted type in general extremely difficult. With him, everything tends to disappear and get concealed. His judgment appears cold, obstinate, arbitrary, and inconsiderate, simply because he is related less to the object than the subject. One can feel nothing in it that might possibly confer a higher value upon the object; it always seems to go beyond the object, leaving behind it a flavour of a certain subjective superiority. Courtesy, amiability, and friendliness may be present, but often with a particular quality suggesting a certain uneasiness, which betrays an ulterior aim, namely, the disarming of an opponent, who must at all costs be pacified and set at ease lest he prove a disturbing-element. In no sense, of course, is he an opponent, but, if at all sensitive, he will feel somewhat repelled, perhaps even depreciated. Invariably the object has to submit to a certain neglect; in worse cases it is even surrounded with quite unnecessary measures of precaution. Thus it happens that this type tends to disappear behind a cloud of misunderstanding, which only thickens the more he attempts to assume, by way of compensation and with the help of his inferior functions, a certain mask of urbanity, which often presents a most vivid contrast to his real nature. Although in the extension of his world of ideas he shrinks from no risk, however daring, and never even considers the possibility that such a world might also be dangerous, revolutionary, heretical, and wounding to feeling, he is none the less a prey to the liveliest anxiety, should it ever chance to become objectively real. That goes against the grain. When the time comes for him to transplant his ideas into the world, his is by no means the air of an anxious mother solicitous for her children's welfare; he merely exposes them, and is often extremely annoyed when they fail to thrive on their own account. The decided lack he usually displays in practical ability, and his aversion from any sort of re[accent]clame assist in this attitude. If to his eyes his product appears subjectively correct and true, it must also be so in practice, and others have simply got to bow to its truth. Hardly ever will he go out of his way to win anyone's appreciation of it, especially if it be anyone of influence. And, when he brings himself to do so, he is usually so extremely maladroit that he merely achieves the opposite of his purpose. In his own special province, there are usually awkward experiences with his colleagues, since he never knows how to win their favour; as a rule he only succeeds in showing them how entirely superfluous they are to him. In the pursuit of his ideas he is generally stubborn, headstrong, and quite unamenable to influence. His suggestibility to personal influences is in strange contrast to this. An object has only to be recognized as apparently innocuous for such a type to become extremely accessible to really inferior elements. They lay hold of him from the unconscious. He lets himself be brutalized and exploited in the most ignominious way, if only he can be left undisturbed in the pursuit of his ideas. He simply does not see when he is being plundered behind his back and wronged in practical ways: this is because his relation to the object is such a secondary matter that lie is left without a guide in the purely objective valuation of his product. In thinking out his problems to the utmost of his ability, he also complicates them, and constantly becomes entangled in every possible scruple. However clear to himself the inner structure of his thoughts may be, he is not in the least clear where and how they link up with the world of reality. Only with difficulty can he persuade himself to admit that what is clear to him may not be equally clear to everyone. His style is usually loaded and complicated by all sorts of accessories, qualifications, saving clauses, doubts, etc., which spring from his exacting scrupulousness. His work goes slowly and with difficulty. Either he is taciturn or he falls among people who cannot understand him; whereupon he proceeds to gather further proof of the unfathomable stupidity of man. If he should ever chance to be understood, he is credulously liable to overestimate. Ambitious women have only to understand how advantage may be taken of his uncritical attitude towards the object to make an easy prey of him; or he may develop into a misanthropic bachelor with a childlike heart. Then, too, his outward appearance is often gauche, as if he were painfully anxious to escape observation; or he may show a remarkable unconcern, an almost childlike naivete. In his own particular field of work he provokes violent contradiction, with which he has no notion how to deal, unless by chance he is seduced by his primitive affects into biting and fruitless polemics. By his wider circle he is counted inconsiderate and domineering. But the better one knows him, the more favourable one's judgment becomes, and his nearest friends are well aware how to value his intimacy. To people who judge him from afar he appears prickly, inaccessible, haughty; frequently he may even seem soured as a result of his antisocial prejudices. He has little influence as a personal teacher, since the mentality of his pupils is strange to him. Besides, teaching has, at bottom, little interest for him, except when it accidentally provides him with a theoretical problem. He is a poor teacher, because while teaching his thought is engaged with the actual material, and will not be satisfied with its mere presentation.

With the intensification of his type, his convictions become all the more rigid and unbending. Foreign influences are eliminated; he becomes more unsympathetic to his peripheral world, and therefore more dependent upon his intimates. His expression becomes more personal and inconsiderate and his ideas more profound, but they can no longer be adequately expressed in the material at hand. This lack is replaced by emotivity and susceptibility. The foreign influence, brusquely declined from without, reaches him from within, from the side of the unconscious, and he is obliged to collect evidence against it and against things in general which to outsiders seems quite superfluous. Through the subjectification of consciousness occasioned by his defective relationship to the object, what secretly concerns his own person now seems to him of chief importance. And he begins to confound his subjective truth with his own person. Not that he will attempt to press anyone personally with his convictions, but he will break out with venomous and personal retorts against every criticism, however just. Thus in every respect his isolation gradually increases. His originally fertilizing ideas become destructive, because poisoned by a kind of sediment of bitterness. His struggle against the influences emanating from the unconscious increases with his external isolation, until gradually this begins to cripple him. A still greater isolation must surely protect him from the unconscious influences, but as a rule this only takes him deeper into the conflict which is destroying him within.

The thinking of the introverted type is positive and synthetic in the development of those ideas which in ever increasing measure approach the eternal validity of the primordial images. But, when their connection with objective experience begins to fade, they become mythological and untrue for the present situation. Hence this thinking holds value only for its contemporaries, just so long as it also stands in visible and understandable connection with the known facts of the time. But, when thinking becomes mythological, its irrelevancy grows until finally it gets lost in itself. The relatively unconscious functions of feeling, intuition, and sensation, which counterbalance introverted thinking, are inferior in quality and have a primitive, extraverted character, to which all the troublesome objective influences this type is subject to must be ascribed. The various measures of self-defence, the curious protective obstacles with which such people are wont to surround themselves, are sufficiently familiar, and I may, therefore, spare myself a description of them. They all serve as a defence against 'magical' influences; a vague dread of the other sex also belongs to this category.  Carl Jung.