User Tag List

First 23456 Last

Results 31 to 40 of 105

  1. #31
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kalach View Post
    As we all know, nobody scores nuthin on nuthin. The function use tests depend crucially on your interpretation of the test questions, and (as far as I know) are always equivocal. Indeed, for the function use tests to actually work properly, you'd have to already have a fairly good self-representation of what kind of cognition you actually do engage in, and how to differentiate it when answering questions about your habits of personality.

    And Beebe is wrong about something. I'm not sure what he is wrong about, but there's something about the foundation of his theory of development that seems partial, perhaps most especially to persons with Ne/Si as a core development.

    So-o-o-...

    I think it's probably possible to put Ni operation on hold and focus outside of oneself to play with ideas. I bet when you do it, it uses a lot of stuff you already thought of, and more crucially, it most closely resembles re-interpreting the outside world, often with an absurd or comical slant. If your "Ne" often takes the form of "Well, if what we were just talking about is so, then it's probably because of the aliens--they're among us, you know? And that's why so many people are afraid of green. [Etc and so developing wilder and wilder implications]". If that's the "Ne" you guys are doing, then it's Ni.

    (Or more technically, it's Te being straight man and Ni playing the comic.)

    And Ne people don't do it that way. They change the subject when one begins rattling off that way.
    Kalach, what do you think of the attribute commonly attributed to Ne of spontaneously seeing/making/understanding connections (puns, metaphors, similes, etc.) between various objects in the real world right in front of your face?

  2. #32
    Sugar Hiccup OrangeAppled's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/sx
    Socionics
    IEI Ni
    Posts
    7,661

    Default

    I like the way Ne is described....seems right to me. Although, having Ne in the auxiliary position works a bit differently of course. Some of the OP amounts to an introvert's experience with an extrovert, which I can relate to. I tend to need time to process things alone, and do not ping back & forth with the ease that a Ne-dom does. I think I am much more articulate in writing than in person also, partly because of the time delay it allows. I definitely have found Ne-dom brain picking tiring and overwhelming.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    I'm pinging around workplace meetings right now, but I'll have to revisit this thread.

    The quote above definitely resonated -- I think the most pervasive issue I've had with Ni-primaries is feeling like they didn't like me, or that we weren't connecting, because instead of reaching out to engage and/or accept engagement, they would always pull back and disappear on me, like turtles going back into their shells, as soon as things got going, and I never knew how to read any of it. It was confounding, and meanwhile left me rather speechless since I did not want to misinterpret thing or intrude where I was not wanted. I just had no clue how to read it.

    It's like they just lived inside a black box, in the typical sense of the word. I had no clue what was going on in there. I could only see the Je perspective, but to me that was just a "working costume/demeanor" and not really the core of who they were, which remained cloaked.
    I experience something similar when I deal with Ni-dom and Ni-aux. Particularly NFJs seem annoyed that I don't initiate much, but they don't realize they can seem as inconsistent as me when it comes to opening up that inner world.
    Often a star was waiting for you to notice it. A wave rolled toward you out of the distant past, or as you walked under an open window, a violin yielded itself to your hearing. All this was mission. But could you accomplish it? (Rilke)

    INFP | 4w5 sp/sx | RLUEI - Primary Inquisitive | Tritype is tripe

  3. #33
    Retired Member Wonkavision's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    7w8
    Socionics
    IEE
    Posts
    1,155

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    What do you think of the attribute commonly attributed to Ne of spontaneously seeing/making/understanding connections (puns, metaphors, similes, etc.) between various objects in the real world right in front of your face?
    This is really off-the-cuff, but I suspect that's more of an Ne-Ti thing than an Ne-Fi one.

    The connections that I see tend to be more about people's motivations, what they're feeling, the subtext underlying their statements, etc.

    (Actually, that's not really it. That was kind of BS. )

    The main connections I see/make/understand are the overarching similarities or points of agreement between various ideas, concepts, philosophies, statements, etc. --synthesizing them in a holistic way----sort of like how Joseph Campbell links all those different myths and so forth.

    I'm not so keen on puns, metaphors, and similies.
    __________________


    I'M OUTTA HERE.

    IT'S BEEN FUN.

    TAKE CARE.

    PEACE OUT!!!


  4. #34
    Filthy Apes! Kalach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    4,318

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    Kalach, what do you think of the attribute commonly attributed to Ne of spontaneously seeing/making/understanding connections (puns, metaphors, similes, etc.) between various objects in the real world right in front of your face?
    Honestly? I haven't seen it be wielded with insight.

    The one time I saw, literally saw, Ne at work, it was Ne overload. I told an ENFP a personal story she totally hadn't expected and she spaced out. It was kind of funny. Apparently the story changed a lot of things she'd understood, or had been keeping on hold as possibly understood, and her brain overloaded.

    But, and perhaps I haven't been hanging around the right people, I haven't seen it used to uncover core truths. There's constant investigation, but if there were any staging points of somewhat completed understanding, I never heard about it in a way I could understand. The constant investigation-ness makes all conclusions halfway not worth listening to.

    And I'm aware of viewing it that way only because the constancy of investigation undermines a crucial step in my process: from time to time I have to say XYZ is true, and act on it (and then learn something new), and if XYZ is supposed to be question again *before* I act, I don't get to act.

    ^ presumably a constant J vs P issue, but perhaps with some added piquancy if it's Ne P vs Ni J since in theory we're both working the same turf.
    Bellison uncorked a flood of horrible profanity, which, translated, meant, "This is extremely unusual."

    Boy meets Grr

  5. #35
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    2,390
    Quote Originally Posted by Kalach View Post
    And Ne people don't do it that way. They change the subject when one begins rattling off that way.
    Correct, Ni can pick any random topic and use Te to elaborate upon it, Ni can be the fool and Te the data gatherer and Fi (or indeed Ni's iconology) the critic. Ne instinctually seeks out new topics altogether when depth wishes to be discovered or will want to come back later if Ti is tickled

    (Caveat pre-mud slinging: This is an ENTP INTJ example)

  6. #36
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kalach View Post
    Honestly? I haven't seen it be wielded with insight.

    The one time I saw, literally saw, Ne at work, it was Ne overload. I told an ENFP a personal story she totally hadn't expected and she spaced out. It was kind of funny. Apparently the story changed a lot of things she'd understood, or had been keeping on hold as possibly understood, and her brain overloaded.

    But, and perhaps I haven't been hanging around the right people, I haven't seen it used to uncover core truths. There's constant investigation, but if there were any staging points of somewhat completed understanding, I never heard about it in a way I could understand. The constant investigation-ness makes all conclusions halfway not worth listening to.

    And I'm aware of viewing it that way only because the constancy of investigation undermines a crucial step in my process: from time to time I have to say XYZ is true, and act on it (and then learn something new), and if XYZ is supposed to be question again *before* I act, I don't get to act.

    ^ presumably a constant J vs P issue, but perhaps with some added piquancy if it's Ne P vs Ni J since in theory we're both working the same turf.
    Let me rephrase:

    The following quality is often attributed to Ne:

    spontaneously seeing/making/understanding connections (puns, metaphors, similes, etc.) between various objects in the real world right in front of your face

    So, if an Ni-dom/aux is very good at seeing/making/understanding connections (puns, metaphors, similes, etc.) between various objects in the real world right in front of their face, do you believe this behavior more likely shows usage of Ni, or something else (Se+Ni? Ni+Te?)?

    There's always that damn question of whether various functions team together and then look like one other function, or whether a person is really just using that other function (in this case, an INTJ using Ne).

    The self-proclaimed Jungian structuralists and what not (like yourself) always seem to argue that it must be a combination of functions mimicking the behavior of another singular function, and then people who don't care to hold so rigidly to strict MBTI doctrine (assuming, of course, that this means what you've called "Jungian structuralism") are willing to consider the notion that maybe they just use the other function (i.e., Ne in this case).

    That seems to be a practical (or theoretical?) hurdle that we just can't seem to get around, no matter how much we argue.

    Unless you could actually empirically test for functional usage (which, based on that "Mindframes" stuff I posted about earlier, you might actually be able to do), I don't see how this debate would ever be resolved.

    Anyway, your thoughts on whether that INTJ is actually using Ne or not...

  7. #37
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    2,390
    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    Anyway, your thoughts on whether that INTJ is actually using Ne or not...
    The INTJ is using Ni-Te to 'fake Ne' but note that an INTJ will slip into periods of internal cognitition in conversation as they grasp with the subject.

    I was recently asked a question regarding what I would like my house to look like by an xNTP. We chatted away for 20 minutes. Eventually I returned to the question and said 'Oh yeah the house will have, a,b,c....x,y,z'. They were like 'wow you were still thinking about that?'. The answer was yes, in the breaks of the other conversation. The ideas come as quickly to anyone regardless of dominant functions; but an Ni user will not feel the idea is well enough constructed until they are comfortable with the external environments response to put this forward.

    Note that Ni lives and loves idea detail from internal cognition and categorizes ideas based upon internal benchmarks and iconology (with a little bit of Te to fill in the edges for an INTJ). It presents ideas to the world as 'complete'. For the INTJ engaging with Te helps them to feel less threatened by the external world and therefore become less defensive by seeing that their internal model not fitting the external world is 'just fine'.

    Ne loves ideas in the purest external sense, wishing not to clutter them with over-realization. It engages with the world to exchange ideas to and fro with other people and will push through an idea boundary to apply other pure ideas to create unique realisations. Ne doesn't attempt to complete ideas, leaving that for later and for an internal aspect to deal with. The Ne user jumps into the world and becomes extrovert as there is no barrier between their internal model and the external world like an Ni user.

  8. #38
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    ...or he could just be using Ne.

    (Not sure if you got this, but I'm well aware of the Ni+Te "masking" as Ne theory; I just don't think there's proof for either notion, and Ne usage by the INTJ could just as likely be the reality.)

  9. #39
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    2,390
    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    ...or he could just be using Ne.

    (Not sure if you got this, but I'm well aware of the Ni+Te "masking" as Ne theory; I just don't think there's proof for either notion, and Ne usage by the INTJ could just as likely be the reality.)
    There generally isn't proof involved in typology. Just a warning; it's all empirical. Socionics gives INTJ's a big fat Ne at the front, but its a kind of half INTP/INTJ hybrid cognitively. Socionic's focus is on how people look 'externally' to the viewer while merging this with internal dissonance.

    For example, in Socionics I test and appear as INTP due to internal dissonance 'Ni leading internally and externally' rather than the Jung/MBTI approach of defining the internal mind.

    People assuming I am Se when I talk technically and get out a whiteboard; but in effect I'm Te'ing before their eyes and doing a mind screen dump and I get very pissy when people try to mess up the chain of thought as it is running; an alarming Ni tendancy. Another thing is that I won't talk about things that do not interest me at all and that interest is my comfort zone of existing knowledge. I'll just say 'I have no opinion on the matter'. Not so Se/Ne after all.

  10. #40
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by InvisibleJim View Post
    Socionics gives INTJ's a big fat Ne at the front...
    Actually, Socionics gives INTjs a big fat Ti at the front...

    MBTI's INTP = Socionics' INTj

Similar Threads

  1. A Jungian Cognitive Function Analysis
    By RaptorWizard in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 11-02-2012, 12:04 PM
  2. F versus T: From a Jungian Cognitive Functions Perspective
    By Esoteric Wench in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 04-01-2012, 06:10 PM
  3. Cat parasites trump Jungian cognitive functions :)
    By sculpting in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 02-10-2012, 07:15 PM
  4. What is your dominant Jungian cognitive function?
    By highlander in forum Online Personality Tests
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 03-17-2011, 02:06 AM
  5. Alternating Jungian Cognitive Functions
    By bechimo in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 08-29-2010, 02:03 PM

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