http://www.socionics.com/articles/rtst.html

Rationalize The Same Thing, Only Differently
同源异路（输出系统）
08 December 2007
by I/O

“Ethical”, “feeling”, “thinking”, “logical” and “rational” are unfortunate terms that have connotations that are not necessarily a true depiction of what was intended by Socionics or Meyers-Briggs. They seem to imply that if one is not ethical, feeling, thinking, logical or rational then one must be the opposite – not true.

“伦理”、“情感”、“思考”、“逻辑”与“理性”这样的用词，在Socionis理论或MBTI理论中，不幸地被与实际情况割裂开了。他们似乎在暗示，人是非F即T（或者相反）的——但这并非事实。

F (or ethical) and T (or logical) are both rationalization processes that operate on different sets of conditions. The differences in conditions can create significant differences in perspective and activity. T and F will draw divergent conclusions from the same set of circumstances. However, in many other scenarios, F and T may draw the same conclusion, but that conclusion would be based on much different criteria.

F（伦理）与T（逻辑）都是针对不同条件调用的思辨进程。条件变量的不同可导致全局观点与行动间的显著差异。T与F对于同样的情形，会得出相异的结论。然而，在其他情况下，F与T也可能殊途同归。

F is value driven rationalization. It is a logical process that operates on relative values. B values X more than C so X will be allotted to B. Even though X may be more valuable to B, C could have perhaps made better use of X. The decision has a logical premise; however, it may or may not have had the best possible outcome. Because people create “value”, F demonstrates a personalized perspective of self and the external world that shows up in decision-making – that all problems can be solved when everyone recognizes the value in it. This doesn’t imply that T would neglect values – there’s utility in values.

F是价值驱动的思辨方式。从相互关系上来说，这也是个合乎逻辑的进程。对于X来说，与B匹配比之与C匹配更具价值，因此X最终被分配给了B。尽管X可能对B更有价值，但可能将X分配给C可以使X被更好地应用。这样的结论是基于逻辑前提的，但并非一定导向潜在的最优输出。因为是人类来构建“价值”，F展示的是个人化的对于自身及外部世界，进行决断的模式——若是人人皆能意识到自身价值体系所在，所有的问题均可通过这套回路解决。这也并不意味着T忽视价值——效用也是价值的一部分。

T is utility driven rationalization. It is a logical process that operates on application of resources, which include people and self. B can make better use of X than can C, so X will be allotted to B. X may never be employed because B may not value X. Because C places more value on X, X might have actually been employed albeit in a less useful fashion. The decision might have considered the best interests of both B and C but it may or may not have had the best possible outcome. T demonstrates an impersonal perspective of self and the external world that shows up in decision-making – that all problems can be solved when the correct resources are applied to them. This doesn’t imply that F would neglect utility – there’s value in utility.

T是效果驱动的思辨方式。从资源运用（包括人类及自身）上来说，这是个合乎逻辑的过程。对于X来说，分配给B比之分配给C，可以让X被更好地应用，因此X最终被分配给了B。X可能永远也不被调用，因为B不需要X的价值。而C更需要X的价值，这可能导致X实际上被C调用——尽管是以不那么高效的方式。这个决定得同时考虑到B与C的最大利益，但同样也不一定导向最优输出。T展示的是客观的对于自身及外部世界，进行决断的模式——若是资源都能够被正确分配，所有的问题均可通过这套回路解决。这也并不意味着F忽视效用——价值也暗含在效用中。

If N or S is the dominant function, T and F are forced to adapt to the input, which likely comes in free format. However, T and F still rationalize all the data albeit at times, are forced to do it out-of-the-box. If F or T is dominant, input is likely rearranged into a preconceived format – constrained by rationalized filters. All human output except for the most primal are created through rationalization processes. People may exhibit irrational, illogical or insensitive behaviour, or make irrational, illogical or insensitive decisions; however, that’s human nature and can apply to anyone.

若N/S为主导功能，T/F则必须与这套输入系统相适应，这种情况下输入系统提供的信息流是自由的。然而，T/F依旧在对数据进行思辨（重组）处理，虽说有时是采用了即入即判（未经深入检视）的模式。如果T/F为主导功能，输入系统提供的信息可能会被按其需求（预想方式）重组——为思辨系统所过滤。人类的输出配置（由思辨系统——T/F介导）均期望达到最大输出功率。人可能会一时展现无理、不合逻辑、麻木迟钝的行为或做出这样的决定，然而，这（期望达到最大输出功率）毕竟是人类的本性，可适用于任何人。