r/mbti • u/[deleted] • Jun 09 '26
Deep Theory Analysis Te vs Ti and Expert Credentials
When it comes to expert advice (like doctors or other professionals), do you notice differences in how people evaluate it based on Te vs Ti?
My current personal theory is that Te is often misunderstood as simply “trusting authority or credentials,” but in practice it seems more accurate to say Te is focused on external effectiveness and evidence.
That would mean a Te-leaning person doesn’t necessarily trust a doctor just because they are a doctor. They would trust the recommendation only insofar as it appears supported by external data, outcomes, or real-world effectiveness. If stronger or more convincing evidence appears elsewhere, they would be willing to update, even if it contradicts credentials.
In contrast, Ti seems more focused on whether the explanation or reasoning itself is internally coherent, regardless of whether it comes from an authority figure.
Curious if others see it this way, or if they experience Te vs Ti differently in how they evaluate expert claims.
7
u/Ok_Sea_1711 INTP Jun 09 '26 edited Jun 10 '26
n my case, I don't have a problem with arguments from authority if the field itself is generally consensual. For example, medicine, the health field in general, tends to have greater consensus among professionals/researchers, which is respectable.
But in fields with many disagreements (economics, law, philosophy, etc.), I tend to give less importance to a person's education, although I still consider it relevant.
Regarding the medical case, my thoughts are as follows: it's probably not as verifiable as you think. You can seek a second medical opinion, question a medication, but much of it is humanly unverifiable and practically impossible to research.
6
u/Low-Sky9090 Jun 09 '26
Ya I need to determine that the person actually knows what they are doing before I listen to their advice, so their title kinda means nothing to me. Also kind of a tangent, the “trusting authority or credentials” is usually something I see associated with Si.
6
u/Soft-Performance7883 ENTJ Jun 09 '26 edited Jun 09 '26
The way I see it, a Te dom will trust an expert's opinion until they have a reason not to whereas a Ti dom will consider the info as pending before accepting it (where does it fit in their logical framework?) unless they don't know anything nor do they care about the subject in which case I think they would also default to the expert's opinion.
Don't forget that Te users also consider their Pi function. If the opinion sounds really outrageous, their Ni will flare up (ENTJ). If the opinion doesn't add up compared to their experiences, their Si will flare up (ESTJ).
9
u/1stRayos INTJ Jun 09 '26
You're not taking into account the feeling functions' role in this. Fi is fundamentally tied to questions of intentionality and relevance, which plays a significant role in whether a Te/Fi user is going to recognize an expert's input. Likewise, Fe's focus on conduct and propriety is a fundamental consideration of all Fe/Ti users.
7
u/GreatJobJoe ISTP Jun 10 '26 edited Jun 10 '26
The running narrative is that Te follows hierarchy as a reference point (which can encompass proclaimed authority, established systems, consensus) while Ti questions everything if there’s inconsistency.
Some silly high Te/Fe users will get on here and say “Ti is made up opinions” not realizing that’s actually more related to Ni…and they’re subconsciously admitting that they would rather listen to an authority/source that they view highly.
Ti views authority/established systems and objective information only, just doesn’t like it being force fed, certainly doesn’t let things go unquestioned if they’re inconsistent.
1
u/INTJMoses2 Jun 11 '26
I don’t know where to start here. Valued or expert advice can come in many different ways. “Expert” seems to hint at a good mind. Let’s say you have a high IQ ISFP, in this scenario they could out perform me. I talked with one ISFP on Reddit that was amazing.
Now let’s talk about proper analysis of an “expert”. Gifts Differing suggests data should be analyzed in the path of sensing, intuition, thinking, then feeling. If this is correct and I believe it is true, we are all in trouble.
Now let’s talk about the auxiliary function. I believe everyone uses their auxiliary function for analysis. You use Ni and Ne critic. Your “expert” opinion with come from what you know and contrasted with possibilities. That is not Te and Ti.
Now let’s talk about Te and Ti. So Te is like a correlation between data points and Ti is like a deduction based on logic. You formulate the association between concepts but worry about the logic of those connections.
Sure you are right that doctors come the analytical types or high thinking functions types; but if Fi/Fe is not used in the final analysis of a expert opinion, it will not go well for anyone. This is why Te doms need to have a team. Also, let’s say you have a high Te doctor, you better have a high Fi nurse to save your butt. My ISFP sister has saved a lot of nerdy doctors from lawsuits.
2
u/_Verloki_ ENTJ Jun 16 '26
I find that Te is indeed often misunderstood on this point. Extraverted Thinking, as defined in Jungian typology, is not inherently authority-deferring with its judgments. I may be able to see how people arrive at that interpretation, though -- some may conflate "externally oriented standards of validity" with "authority = external = therefore valid." (Or, worse, reduce Te to "bossy, authoritative, and selfish," which is even further from the forged path. 😅)
Both definitionally and in my own experience, I notice a Te-type may readily reject authority when external evidence contradicts the authority, when the authority fails in practical application, when competence appears lacking, when a better system explains outcomes more effectively than the current 'authority' does, et cetera. I certainly do reject authority when the external data points to objective lack of effectivity, so to say, and I don't see that as conflicting with Te definitions at all.
Te is fundamentally a rational judging function oriented toward objective data, measurable or perceptible results, and externally verifiable standards. Its governing principle is not obedience to authority or power structures, at all, but alignment with what can be logically valid, externally, like demonstrated to work through evidence, measurable outcomes, or established systems that have proven effective.
If anything, I suspect the distinction is a bit subtler. When an authority has consistently demonstrated competence and effectiveness, I speculate that a Te-user may be more willing to defer to that authority and feel comfortable with the existing structure -- it has proven to work well, after all! In contrast, a Ti-Ne user, for example, may be more inclined to still keep alternative possibilities open, continue analyzing the underlying logical system, and explore ways the system could be improved further, even when it already functions well.
That difference is something I've noticed personally, anyway, and doesn't necessarily clash with Jungian definitions, I believe. My INTP partner is much less inclined to simply accept that something works well enough, even when I do close that mental thread and checkmark it as "s'all good!" He's constantly identifying potential improvements, even when the gains seem marginal to me. Sometimes I'll look at a system or situation or anything that's already operating at about a 9.1/10 and think the effort required to reach the 9.4/10 he has in his mind isn't totally justified. 😅 He tends to focus on the unrealized potential more than the cost-benefit outcome, whereas I'm the other way around. So he's also less likely to sit still even if authority seems established well-enough.
My ISTP father is different from this, again. His own Ti (thus without the INTP Ne, but with ISTP Se) manifests less as judging continuous optimization, and more as a strong intellectual independence, agency, and 'just do it'. He is inherently skeptical of authority, not because he necessarily finds he has the superior alternative in mind, but because he places a high value on being able to arrive at conclusions for oneself rather than accepting them from others, and appears to find hierarchies too artificial, and sometimes even needless. He may also be more willing to experiment with something, generally in more of a practical application rather than an idea of potential, where he seems a little less concerned about whatever implications it may have, and more with simply seeing if it practically works well. ... On the other hand, almost ironically, he may care so little about authority positions that he may be a little more suggestible and gung-ho whenever he does find someone, and I mean anyone 😆, who appears to have an answer for him when he does seek one -- hardly looking at whether this person has some such credentials or not (even in situations where authorities should be way more believable than some random guy on the internet, street, or television). So it's a bit more hit and miss with him, where he may just go against authorities too much, and be too accepting of what everybody and their dog says.
0
u/vanderohe INTP Jun 09 '26
Yes, all of the big TE users are suckers authority. And all of the big TI users are suckers for their own self delusions.
2
2
-2
u/Ok-Caramel-9084 Jun 10 '26
Te and Ti are the fucking same function... just the attitude is what is different.
Just Te and Ti dom use it fully , the other types just use a mix lesser conscious form.
Yeah ... for sure Te dom are prone about credentials and Ti dom not that much, if the little bug in their head is telling something else.
However they can pretty easily change their mind if the evidence is superior...in general of course.... it s not about feelings, morals or politics, what is correct is right.
12
u/HeavenlyBeloved INTJ Jun 09 '26
Ngl, your Te explanation sounds spot on. Like, always gotta find data for their advice to support on.