The Sakinorva Databank
home index activity
random rules donate

Jungian Ti type

Psychological Types

in Philosophy, Psychology, and Social Sciences

Jungian Ti type ~ Sakinorva Databank

Jungian Ti type

Psychological Types

5w6 5
5w4 3
sp/sx 4
sp/so 1
234 567 891

total votes 36







Click to toggle markup guide.

hyperlink to "contextualizing functions"[hyperlink to "contextualizing functions"](





2018/06/14 (Thu) 04:48:09


Lii fits more with 6 wing * 

Editing post #1217 by Diobono

Replying to post #1217 by Diobono





2018/06/14 (Thu) 04:47:33


The jung description makes the ti type sound too mystical and  images of  visionary not to be a ni dom in socionics imo. also he describes him as being inconsistent in his work or something like that. I think that's more of a ili thing to be honest since they only have demonstrative ti. I'm being syncretistic but  ili fits more with a 6 wing rather than ili with a 4 wing maybe  due to suggestive fi.

Man i'm switching over to socionics in this period its more interesting than mbti and function typing is more justifiable lol.

Editing post #1216 by Diobono

Replying to post #1216 by Diobono




Beta ST

2018/06/12 (Tue) 04:46:12


i agree with your Schopenhauer Socionics typing

Editing post #1181 by fg

Replying to post #1181 by fg


2018/06/11 (Mon) 17:40:05


Here's a list of IDR's INFJ Pure Ti Types: 

Plato (LII and 1w9) 
Jung (LII and 5w6) 
Wittgenstein (LII and 5w4) 
Chomsky (LII and 1w9) 
Dante (LII and 1w9) 
Spinoza (SLI and 5w6) 

There are a lot of different archetypes here.  Sometimes you have a mixed F-N person: Joanna Newsom (Jungian Fe and INFJ by letters) 

Sufjan Stevens is Ni-Fi or Fi-Ni, probably the latter. 

De Beauvoir seems legitimately EII, INFJ, 1w9 etc. 

Then you have a few Ni types on there: 

Schopenahuer (INTx 5w4 ILI, Ni-Ti) and Lars Von Trier (INTx 4w5 and IxI - pure Ni)

It's quite the mix.  

Editing post #1176 by lvna

Replying to post #1176 by lvna





2018/06/11 (Mon) 16:24:55


Socionics I lean LII for, although it's a close call. Socionics does seem to take that next step in "J-ness" for its LII, which leads to something that is more like a hybrid between 5w6 and 1w9 without as much of a prevailing subjective factor as Jung's more 5w4-ish Ti. I feel like IDR INTP is very similar to Socionics LII, although yes people like Hegel are considered LII in Socionics yet INTJ in IDRlabs. I also love that phrase "ivory tower thinker".

Editing post #1175 by edza

Replying to post #1175 by edza





2018/06/11 (Mon) 16:18:01


I do agree with most of what Diabono said. It's my thought that Ti type aligns more with MBTI J, mainly because the Ti type, while inherently subjective, will use that subjective vision as a guiding force to synthesize "reasoned judgment" which could be somewhat of a personal code which is used to structure one's life. I don't think his Ti type is nearly as obviously "J" as the Te counterpart, but it still has a lot of the same elements involved. It is not interested in free exploration as much as following a singular visionary pathway.

For IDRlabs I feel like I need to bring up not only INTP and INTJ but also INFJ of all things. They seem to have categorized a prioritized subjective factor/ primordial vision as "Ni" a lot of times, while Jung would consider that more of an "introvert" thing, and in the case of the Ti type, subjective thought constructions are the result. So what would be considered in Jung as basically:
Subjective factor -> T = Ti type

would in IDRlabs be converted to:
Ni -> Ti = INFJ

Which is why a lot of the more subjective philosophers who would be clear Ti types in Jung end up getting typed as INFJ if their subjective factor is overwhelming.

It's actually the Ti types that balance their Ti out with little Te and grounding their subjectivity a bit that tend to land the INTP typing from IDRlabs.

So while I may be reaching a little bit here, I think there's a case to be made for INFJ, at least in the sense of the purest Ti types getting typed as INFJ in IDRlabs, although they do also list people as INFJ who are not that. So the INFJ category over there ends up being an inconsistent hodgepodge of different archetypes, one of which resembles Jung's pure Ti type.
Their INTJ seems about equal parts Ti and Te, with a few exceptions, which is why I would rank it below both INFJ and INTP.

Editing post #1174 by edza

Replying to post #1174 by edza





2018/06/11 (Mon) 15:25:22


Also in IDR the intps are the real ivory tower thinkers, the  extremely abstract and highly metaphysical sort of  thinkers which are basically the jungian Ti type. But Idr also puts Hegel as Intj, and he is probably the most ivory tower type thinker in all of fucking history lol.  They also put Heraclitus,  known as "the obscure" because he is one of the most cryptic philosophers in general . So i don't think the sort of person Jung describes is necessarily an intp in IDR. 

To summarise i think intp and intj are generally on the same level in terms of mental wankery so both could fit into the jungian Ti type.

Editing post #1171 by Diobono

Replying to post #1171 by Diobono





2018/06/11 (Mon) 15:10:04


I'm making these entries because Psychological Types is a work of Practical Psychology as Jung says in the Foreword and so his jungian functions descriptions are derived from his interactions with his patients and not from pure theory. 

As he says it's "compounded by numberless impressions and experiences in the practice of Psychiatry". So it's interesting to me to understand what the pure function types of jung would translate into by using Mbti and the new functions descriptions. 

Jungian Ti type is obviously a mish mash of various  intx 5w4 maybe 5w6. But i'd go with 5w4  and also Ili because he does not have the consistency of a 5w6 and his ideas are too personalized and not systematic to be lii. He also fits very well with fi as a suggestive function and he sounds sort of sexual instinct in how he has "primitive affects" and has a weak spot for intimacy, obviously sp first though

In Idr vote he would probably be intp considering functionally how he puts the theory and "subjective factor" above factual data. But tbh i disagree  with the idr intj and don't see why a Ni dominant would not be a theory first, facts later even going by their functions descriptions.

Editing post #1170 by Diobono

Replying to post #1170 by Diobono

20/12/19 06:42Freaky_sage INTJ
19/08/22 23:41Tman ITP
19/02/05 22:14Taco110 INTJ
18/06/15 04:11EON INTJ
18/06/11 05:32lvna INTJ
18/06/11 04:18edza INTJ
18/06/11 02:25Diobono INTJ
22/04/08 03:46Woll Smoth INFJ
21/08/20 12:52Lawless INTP
19/02/05 22:17Taco110 INFJ
18/06/11 05:32lvna INFJ
18/06/11 04:18edza INFJ
19/05/21 09:36DIobono INFJ
21/08/20 12:52Lawless 5w6
20/12/19 06:42Freaky_sage 5w6
19/10/25 11:52Taco110 5w6
19/10/25 12:41Thyssen 5w6
19/02/06 14:47tman 5w6
18/06/11 04:25edza 5w4
18/06/11 02:23Diobono 5w4
21/08/20 12:52Lawless sp/so
20/12/19 06:42Freaky_sage sp/sx
19/10/25 11:52Taco110 sp/sx
19/08/22 23:22Tman sp/sx
18/06/11 02:23Diobono sp/sx
19/08/22 23:22Tman 593
22/03/28 03:26Woll Smoth LII
21/08/20 12:52Lawless LII
20/12/19 06:42Freaky_sage LII
19/10/25 11:52Taco110 LII
18/08/23 11:03switchblades LII
18/06/13 01:18Zeego LII
18/06/11 05:32lvna LII
18/06/11 04:25edza LII
18/06/11 03:11Diobono ILI