# Thread: Functions explained in own words

1. A sort of silly version of how I understand the functions (which may be way off, assuming the brain actually uses something like these functions.):

Se: there is dark brown, sticky, mud on my shoe

Si: there is some mud on my shoe that is not normally there

Ne: there is some mud on my shoe, that might have come from the ground, the sidewalk, an alien depositing it there, a prank being played....

Ni: there is some mud on my shoe, getting it off could involve either running, dissolving plus rubbing to clear it, maybe some soap...

Te: There is mud on my shoe that must be off NOW!

Ti: there is mud on my shoe that must have come from some outside source.

Fe: there is mud on my shoe, that will offend the people around me, and should be taken off

Fi: there is mud on my shoe, I do not value mud on the shoes, so will remove it. (this one is iffy, I'm not too sure how to connect personal values with this situation.)

2. Originally Posted by Splittet
Well, I was talking about the open-endedness in the two functions, maybe I am using the word wrong though. But a way of viewing Ne and Ni is to look at Ne as giving ever expanding results. You start out with something little and end up with something huge. Ni on the other hand is about synthesising, so you start out with a vast amount of perspectives, and from them you end up with a synthesised view. The point is, you are reaching for conclusions, which is kind of the opposite of open-endedness. :P That means Ni is >, while Ne is <. I am not saying this is my opinion, they are just some thoughts, potential views on what Ni and Ne are.
Oh, okay. I understand your point.

That wouldn't be J vs. P in the traditional use of those letters. But I've wondered about similar issues. Comparing T and F, for example, T sometimes seems reductive (break things apart and analyze) and F often seems assimilative (piling feelings on top of each other and comparing).

As for your specific example, though, I wonder... Both Ne and Ni seem to start with a single idea or experience or piece of data and see larger possibilities, in the sense of fitting the idea/data into a larger existing network or web of previous ideas/data. It's only later in the game (after the idea/data has been processed and assigned a place in the "network") that possibilities get pared down and ideas synthesized.

Ne types may do the synthesis process as much as Ni types. That is, it seems to me that Ne types will also reduce and synthesize at the end of their processing process much like Ni types. It's just that everything's out in the open, and the input and processing portion is big and attention-grabbing. But in the end, they presumably synthesize focused ideas and results from their experiences as well. IOW, sooner or later a judgment (J) is made to end the processing (P) of data.

Just for a possible parallel: Fi starts with many feelings and eventually pares them down into a few core values; similarly, Fe starts with many externalized feeling tools and hones them into a few favorite tools for dealing with people.

Though, of course, F is a judging function and may not compare directly to N.

Just guessing, though....

3. Originally Posted by Dana
I don't see INTP stubbornness as a fault. I think INTPs are stubborn when it comes to others imposing their beliefs on what truth is and how to live upon them.

In what way does INTJ stubbornness manifest?
Using the theoretical basis of perceiving functions (N and S) versus judging functions (T and F):

INTPs will keep their judging Ti largely hidden and will interact with the world mostly via their perceiving Ne. So the world will see them for the most part as interested in new ideas and willing to consider things in an open-ended manner. Stubbornness will only come up when a particular issue impacts a core value or idea that's important to their hidden judging Ti, at which point they can dig in their heels and become surprisingly resistant.

INTJs, on the other hand, will keep their perceiving Ni largely hidden and will interact with the world mostly via their judging Te. So the world will see them for the most part as resistant to input and judgmental about issues that don't conform with previously held beliefs. They can almost seem anti-intellectual and close-minded at times. But if input is seen as relevant to material currently being processed by their hidden perceiving Ni, then they will admit that input and do amazing things with it, i.e., process it endlessly in conjunction with other ideas and in ways that other people wouldn't consider. At that point, their voraciousness and nimbleness with ideas comes to the forefront.

Again, this is a theory-based explanation.

4. Thanks for that.. you quite neatly put those functions into action for me.. I have been struggling to understand how they manifest, but now I have much more perspective.

Jennifer, thanks for you post as well. I most certainly know what INTPs can be like when they are suspicious you are manipulating them! Urgh.

5. I think I better put down my own version before I go take a peek at everybody else's answers...

Ne/Ni... These two give me big headaches... I couldn't differentiate very well between them. Uhhhh let's see.
Ne - Seeing patterns and making connections using things you've noticed in your environment. Formation of a flexible mesh that spreads.
Ni - Coming up with new ways of connecting ideas often based upon multiple or the outside perspective. Synthesis of a unified whole upwards.

Se - Seeing and experiencing the world as it comes to you. What just is. Observation of the world in its brilliant colors... The mind as a camera.
Si - Recollection of knowledge and experiences. A comparison of past and present. Reading the blue print within the mind.

Fs... I'm trying very hard not to use the words feeling and emotion in the descriptions because those two words are very bias.
Fe - Reactive judgments based on feedback obtained from other people. The external frame of reference means judgment can be variable and case specific.
Fi - Judgments based upon internal principles. A standard moral and ethical code is strictly adhered to under all circumstances.

Te - Judgments determined following the logical systematic approach. Case specific, method of optimization and maximal efficiency under the given scenario.
Ti - Judgment based on the rules of logic. Merit is based on the soundness of proofs under a given set of assumptions. Truth is the driving factor, application is but a mere side thought.

6. Originally Posted by FineLine
Ne types may do the synthesis process as much as Ni types. That is, it seems to me that Ne types will also reduce and synthesize at the end of their processing process much like Ni types. It's just that everything's out in the open, and the input and processing portion is big and attention-grabbing. But in the end, they presumably synthesize focused ideas and results from their experiences as well. IOW, sooner or later a judgment (J) is made to end the processing (P) of data.
Just to follow up. Here is the description of the Ne process from From CognitiveProcesses.com:

Extraverted iNtuiting involves noticing hidden meanings and interpreting them, often entertaining a wealth of possible interpretations from just one idea or interpreting what someone's behavior really means. It also involves seeing things "as if," with various possible representations of reality. Using this process, we can juggle many different ideas, thoughts, beliefs, and meanings in our mind at once with the possibility that they are all true. This is like weaving themes and threads together. We don't know the weave until a thought thread appears or is drawn out in the interaction of thoughts, often brought in from other contexts. Thus a strategy or concept often emerges from the here-and-now interactions, not appearing as a whole beforehand. Using this process we can really appreciate brainstorming and trust what emerges, enjoying imaginative play with scenarios and combining possibilities, using a kind of cross-contextual thinking. Extraverted iNtuiting also can involve catalyzing people and extemporaneously shaping situations, spreading an atmosphere of change through emergent leadership.
Extraverted iNtuiting

Translation: Start with one idea, entertain a wealth of possible interpretations, juggle, weave, a thought thread appears, and finally a strategy or concept emerges.

IOW, sounds like a narrowing and synthesis are occuring at the end. Things don't continue getting wider forever.

[Edit:] So the question would be: Do Dominant Ni types (INTJs and INFJs) feel like they are following roughly the same pattern as Ne, albeit internally (not in interaction with the outside world)?

7. Originally Posted by Dana
Thanks for that.. you quite neatly put those functions into action for me.. I have been struggling to understand how they manifest, but now I have much more perspective.
Glad to help. I think this is useful stuff for understanding how others work.

8. Ni: Attempting to find the most comprehensive perspective or combination of perspectives to envision a particular aspect of reality.

Fe: Perceiving other's expressed emotions, and trying to accommodate them, as well as adjust your expression to something mutually acceptable to both of you.

Ti: Understanding the specific nature/structure of things that seem to be consistent between perspectives.

Se: Observing and evaluating what is around you exactly as it is, with no interpretation whatsoever.

What do you think?

9. Reading the Fe posts has made me wonder about the limited development theory raised. We have the understanding that the weakest function is the least developed, therefore we use it less well or not at all. I propose we have a lower tolerance of it's usage not only in ourselves, but in others. When I read descriptions about Fe, I get it. What I find in Fe is the low tolerance I have in others using it, in particularly in attempting to place, or judge others, by their own moral standards. This is also indicative of those having a high usage of Ni having contempt for Se users. It would make one question Beebe's secession theory and give more credibility to Lenore Thomsons.

10. Originally Posted by "?"
... When I read descriptions about Fe, I get it. What I find in Fe is the low tolerance I have in others using it, in particularly in attempting to place, or judge others, by their own moral standards. This is also indicative of those having a high usage of Ni having contempt for Se users. It would make one question Beebe's secession theory and give more credibility to Lenore Thomsons.
I can identify with that... My issue too is really focused on people using Fe in ways I see as unfair or illogical.

#### Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO