its their problem if they wont read it. if they read it, but are not interested of understanding it, then they dont want to understand it hard enough.
I simply don't have time or patience for a giant wall of text that can be better explained in 20 words or less. Distilled down versions give me a better snapshot than a bunch of self important words being tossed in the air.
I thank Oaky and Sky for giving me the "Ne-Ni for Dummies" lesson I sorely needed.
Barely anyone who enters the thread will read it. Be slightly more tactful and summarise to allow those who do not understand to understand things in a more 'for dummies' way.
Most have Ne down correctly.
But as for Ni...
Ni is not: "poof" an idea, which appears out of nowhere.
It is the analysis of the object within different dimensions to be able to see what the object may or may not be.
Let us take an object:
- Moving objects
- Assembly of organs
- Tools of war
All such thoughts are what humans could be. Note: Every thought is connected to the object.
- Lines and colours
- Pleasing sensory perceptions
- Distorted beings
- Many pictures
All the such thoughts are what cartoons are, in different perceptions. Again, every thought is connected to the object. Not move on tangents as Ne tends to do.
Interesting. This makes Ni much more comprehensible, and indeed, much more like Ne as I experience it, compared to other descriptions.
Ne takes an object and explores all the possibilities available within a static category. Ni explores meaningfulness of relation within the interaction of static points of data.
Ne wants to take an object and fulfill its potential within specific, appropriate categories. This is why, even though it seems random to others, the person engaging Ne generally can explain how topic A reached tangent Z. Ni, on the other hand, wants to take that object and understand something about it that isn't immediately apparent, not to satisfy any purpose, but for its own sake.
Originally Posted by skylights
it seems like Ne and Ni move opposite. i've heard all the functions + attitudes described as "conveyor belts" which can be switched clockwise/counterclockwise before, and i can see this on an "N" belt.
Ne, clearly, moves outward. you start at one point and look out into all the things it could be.
Ni, as oaky has demonstrated, moves inward. it takes all the points and finds the least common denominator.
Not sure I'm 100% with you on this one. Both Ne and Ni are concerned with an object's essential nature. Ne, though, seeks to grasp everything that the object's essential nature says about the object itself, i.e. its "possibilities." Ni, on the other hand, seeks to grasp everything that the object itself says about its essential nature.
they both share the philosophy that all things are, in essence, one thing. for Ne, one thing can become many things. for Ni, many things are, when distilled, one thing.
I wouldn't necessarily say that it's "all things are, in essence, one thing." I'd say that the unifying principle is that an object's essential nature transcends what is immediately perceptible. For Ne, that essential nature means that one thing doesn't so much become many things, as it already is many other things. For Ni, the slightest details can radically alter what an object's essential nature is, and thus fundamentally shift its relationship with other things in the world.
what is also significant is how they rest on their partner functions - Se and Si - as i believe orobas has already touched upon. Ne needs the concrete detail of Si to anchor it in space, so that it can look around it and consider all of the possibilities that exist at that singular moment. it negates time as a factor, essentially. Ni needs the concrete detail of Se to anchor it in time, so that it can look around it at that singular location. it negates space as a factor. Ne is a coronal section while Ni is a sagittal section.
Si anchors Ne by providing categories. Without those categories, there is no way of knowing what data point A already needs. Se anchors Ni by paying attention to detail. Without that detail, there is no way to understand the essential distinction between things, and thus no way to determine the true essence.
Ne appears more "random" to us in the present moment because of the negation of time. all those possibilities can exist, but they are not necessarily pertinent when we consider practicality and probability, and change over time. whereas Ni can seem "out of nowhere", because of the negation of what i'm calling "space"... i don't really know how to describe it, but i essentially mean "headspace" - room for expansion. room for differentiation. while Ni may well be correct in its distillations, they might not be pertinent to the present moment - yet. in other words, it may still be more useful to see the particle as a particle instead of a wave-particle, because it's still behaving like a particle in this particular situation.
Ne only seems random because other people can't see the categories in play. The category may be valid, but it may also be of little relevance to the immediate reality.
Ni only seems spacey because other people can't see the importance of the essential understanding. The understanding may be true, but of little practical use.
Well, yeah, Ni is about focusing/honing in on something. Sticking to an idea, building upon it, taking other seemingly unrelated (but related) things to build upon that same idea. Not branching out into multiple ideas. It's always honing inwards and focusing on something, and sticking to that - aiming to grasp that 'one thing'/'truth' relevant to the situation at hand. Wanting that closure/resolution/finality/'answer' to that thing.
and thank you saturned... admittedly half my "explanations" are me trying to explain things to myself
but INTPness' diagram - makes it easy to see why Ne doms are Ps and Ni doms are Js, no? Ne doms inherently move away from closure, whereas Ni doms move towards it.
Yeah, helps me understand why INTJ's are so driven and focused and don't tolerate much goofing around outside of the things they are focused on. Whereas, Ne users want to goof around and explore all the time - always new things, new things, new things.
NTJ's are the only types that have ever made me feel emo.
ENP's are the only types that have ever made me feel like a sensor.
There are two great days in a person's life - the day we are born and the day we discover why. --William Barclay