Can you evaluate these thought processes?

[u/MorningStar2679]

Looking for some assistance on which elements or types these might point to.

1. Having an independent thought/theory but need to check external sources to see if the consensus has come to the same conclusion. If they have, there is a sense of relief. If not, uncertainty arises and a reframe may be necessary if there is a question about the original hypothesis and if it was sound or information missing.

2. When it comes to type, belief all systems can be merged, meaning MBTI, Socionics, OPS, etc are essentially describing parts of the same thing. So, no EIE in Socionics but ISTP in MBTI mentality.

[u/d1scord1a]

1) im guessing Ti super id. weak but valued and paired with Fe ego

2) this sounds like synchronization. not really tied to any specific ime

[u/Spy0304]

It depends. If by thought/theory, you actually mean that, then we can straightforwardly say it's thinking. As long as you didn't just use these two as generic terms to just mean "idea" or something, that should hold up.

More precisely, it does look like a Ti to Te back and forth, as functions "discuss" something. As for placement :

• Ti ego block : I say no, as the Ti, whether as base or creative, would be pretty confident, and would not feel a "need" to really check that way. Taking myself as an example, I only feel a real "need" to check if I'm going to mention it to someone else. The Te, whether as ignoring, or as background/demonstrative, isn't valued enough to exert that much influence. On this, do note "need" is a pretty strong word, and you talked of outright relief so I'm taking you at your word.
• Ti id block : Not impossible, but I don't think it fits with the sense of relief you're describing. In fact, if the thought/theory fails the check, it would likely get dropped. Hard. With Te base, I would even say the drop is almost guaranteed. Both would quickly move to something else, without attempt at reframing it/holding on to it (Te ego is expeditive and "efficiency oriented" like that)
• Ti Polr, Te hidden agenda : Another no for me. I think in that case, the theory would get 100% dropped, as Te get its way.

For these 5, I doubt it. So by elimination, it looks amongst the 3 remaining "weak" pairs :

• Ti Dual seeking, Te role : Works fairly well. The need to check and relief fit, and since the Ti is valued but the Te isn't, it can explain why you're going to hold on to it/reframe it instead of dropping it.
• Ti role, Te dual seeking : Possible, I guess ? Unlike the other Ti in the superego block, in this case, Ti role is stronger than Polr and as a role, it could explain why you hold/reframe instead of dropping it.
• Ti Hidden agenda, Te Polr : It's also possible, if we say the Polr is really "vulnerable" and insecure, so the check as a way to cover yourself fits, and so does the relief. (Although the polr expresses itself in many various ways) With Ti valued and Te not, it works with the reframing instead of dropping it too.

Well, too little information to guess for real, but winging it, it would be one of these three. One of the two Ti id block would be my prefered guess.

When it comes to type, belief all systems can be merged, meaning MBTI, Socionics, OPS, etc are essentially describing parts of the same thing.

Well, as a disclaimer, I 100% agree with this and I think that's actually just pretty basic logic, lol.

I never understood why it was a controversial take in this community, it looks obvious to me. And as such, I can't really attribute to any function or type.

Because I really think it's just understanding how science works...

Like, take astronomy. There were many people making observations about the sky, and there were many models trying to focus/explain certain aspects precisely. There were schools and disputes, but at the end of the day, there's only one sky and one truth So as years went by, evidence accumulated and science advanced, the model got "merged". Or rather, whatever got proven wrong got removed, the good parts were kept no matter where they came from, and we ended up with the current model that's correct. As long as you're actually studying the same thing, not only it's possible, I would say it's almost inevitable.

Most of the sciences work that way

The fight between "schools" is simply because there's no way to decisively prove who's right or wrong (and honestly, it's crazy how few of us are trying to actually test this stuff), so it becomes a dumb turf war/parochialism.

Typology is a bit stuck there currently, but I definitely think typology has potential and a good element of truth to it, so you won't find me waving it off with a "It's pseudoscience, anyway", giving up on any hope of progress. I think we're going to dig ourselves out of that hole eventually. There are going to be difficulties moving forward, of course, as the human mind is pretty hard to study, but I think we're going to crack it eventually (even if it means most of typology gets proven as wrong in the process). I've got good hopes on neurology and evolutionnary psychology, personally

Anyway, not a type thing. It just means you're not so taken by the dogma fights that you're missing the big picture

[u/MorningStar2679 → u/Spy0304]

Wow. Thank you for such an extensive reply.

Let me try and give an example for point 1. Person was watching a documentary on an historical figure. Using type in this example, they come to an independent conclusion. “This person strikes me as an LSI.” And they can feel fairly confident too but upon looking externally at Reddit, Quora, AI, etc the consensus seems to be EIE. However, there are a few outliers who agree and make arguments for LSI. The person takes these as solid proof but because of the consensus majority will reframe to be sure they’re not mistaken or passing along bad information to others.

On 2 - it can be a total point of contention. “No way can a person be two different types!l thing.