Personally, I find a lot of evidence through personal experience to support that there is a significant difference between Te and Ti and if you psychologically value one then you will also psychologically devalue the other

There's definitely a difference between Te and Ti because they are defined differently. I reject the idea that Te is fundamentally incompatible with Ti, not that Te and Ti are different. Essentially, I'm butchering the theory and extracting what I like from it; I don't bind myself to the theory because I don't see any tangible evidence for type dynamics. I get a lot of heat for that on this sub but there is a small, possibly growing, contingent of people who like to take the same liberties as I do. I really like MBTI's constructs, like Fi, Fe, Ti, Te, etc., but I simply view them as one would view traits. When typing, I prefer to look for the broader patterns, e.g. T instead of Ti and Te, F instead of Fi and Fe, etc, because I have found that people who have T typically have Te and Ti in varying proportions.

But obviously, I can't disprove type dynamics, nor is it provable at the present time. If it works for you that's great, to each his own. I tend to think in terms of type dynamics by default, I guess because MBTI was my first foray into personality psychology. It's a good heuristic. I just can't help but feel that the rules of the functional stack are arbitrary. Why must there be a dominant function? Couldn't all the functions in a particular type be equally powerful? Why can't there be two extroverted or introverted functions in a row? Why are the two orientations of the functions mutually exclusive? If E/I determines whether the dom or aux function is extroverted, how does one measure sociability? If J/P determines whether judging or perceiving functions come first in the stack, how does one measure "conscientiousness"? There's just too many questions like this, the answers to which depend only on the internal logic of the theory and nothing in reality.