User Tag List

Page 35 of 92 FirstFirst ... 2533343536374585 ... LastLast
Results 341 to 350 of 914

Thread: Ni - What the hell is it?

  1. #341
    Filthy Apes! Array Kalach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    4,318

    Default

    Ni is subjective. How can this be a good thing?

    If intuition is about abstract connections and implication and as well introverted intuition has at its heart some engine that separates concepts from objective roots, then for example pick any objective attribute you like--age, race, sex, space, time, relationship,... whatever--and Ni can strip it away from the concept to investigate where what's left fits.

    What does Ni do then? I guess it's a process of searching for identities: what is this stripped concept the same as?



    That's it?
    Bellison uncorked a flood of horrible profanity, which, translated, meant, "This is extremely unusual."

    Boy meets Grr

  2. #342
    Filthy Apes! Array Kalach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    4,318

    Default

    Forgive me a moment while I speculate on purposes... It started like this:

    I am not generally aware of matching patterns. I don't consciously, or it seems to me I don't, say "Ooo, a pattern." Instead it seems to me I attend to implications. What will be. It's rather as if a piece of information gets incorporated and its implication appears. The process is considerably less instantaneous than that sentence suggests, but perhaps you get the idea. It's as if perhaps there were already one giant pattern, a ball of smooshed up possible worlds producing the world, and together with this the new information produces visions of what the import of some thing is.

    And there is a dash of Se hidden away making a slant on the implication, a implicit perspective, hardly attended to directly, of how does this implication play out, how is it realised? Not in a sense of planning, necessarily, but in a sense of one way something become real--observed rather than known before. And is it that dash of Se that lends the sense of "will be" to the intuition, or is this intuition already past mere possibility and moved on to "reality"? I think the latter, but I am not sure. The Se is a tool, subordinate, in this scenario, but still a way out, a crutch, a thing that allows particularly introverted intuition to function as it does. Without it reality would have some other flavor, and implications wouldn't flow as they do. Or something.

    And I have wondered if the essential question for extroverted intuition was not, how could the next thing be different from what it is going to be? With a dash of Si present to indicate how all things are now and all things have been before. (Or is it "how can" rather than "how could" the next thing be different? I don't know.)


    Frameworks aren't ruled out, but take that, "contexts"! (Or at least, take that--*boof*--until I edit again.)
    Bellison uncorked a flood of horrible profanity, which, translated, meant, "This is extremely unusual."

    Boy meets Grr

  3. #343
    ¤ Array Zarathustra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    7,729

    Default

    *Z shoots thread in head*

    *thread dies*

    Kalach, please stop playing with the dead thread...
    The Justice Fighter

    XXXX - 6w5 8dw 3w4 sx/so - Neutral Good

    "I trust what you are doing though…I just see it a little differently.
    I don’t see it as you stepping away from the fire. I see it as the fire directing your course.
    No matter how airy or earthy or watery you become... to many of us you will always be...a super nova."

    "Behind these gates of seeming warmth sits, loosely chained, a fierce attack dog. Perhaps not crazy, but dangerous"

    The Aggressive 6
    Debator


  4. #344
    Filthy Apes! Array Kalach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    4,318

    Default

    See, you already know where this is going, to the discovery that Ni and Ne don't "share".

    Personally, I still find it unsettling to note that Ni is subjective.


    But where do the implications come from? Frameworks and contexts, and even perspective shifts, don't explain much, it seems to me. There's a dynamism to the development of implications that seems inconsistent with backwards reference searches. But this may only be an observation about the constructive process itself, the bit at the forefront of consciousness where this or that imagery is acted out to see the shape of what's what. And actually, that point there is where being subjective is useful, because of the seeming giant library it implies. A static library?

    Contrast with Ne.... Extroverted intuition suggests and promotes change in the environment. It at the very least allows for the same things to be viewed in different ways by actually making them be viewed in different ways. This is good news for Si if Si is a basic library of facts and stats and foundational knowledge. If Ne is working with an introverted judgment function, then this environmental change is an information source of the first order. (And if I make everything sound like Se and Ni, it's because I don't have other images readily available.)

    But what's Ni doing? Ni isn't connected to the environment. Change alone is not beneficial. If the person is connected to the environment, it'll be on Se terms. And this whole story is basically perverted because comparing Ni attempts to reach the outside world with Ne attempts is to reveal Ni as a particularly poor external world device. Which is what you'd expect from an introverted function. But it does perhaps reveal that there is always going to be a different take on the external world. An Ne/Si view wonders how it could be different, while an Ni/Se view wonders how it is all going to come true, and is interested to see... sometimes.


    I do sometimes find myself observing patterns in the environment. I mention this because it very definitely has the feel of a cheap use of my cognition. Discovering coulds or mights or mays isn't valuable... not in the outside world. In the inside world.... could, might and may are useful interim steps. In fact, they're steps that occupy most of my day. But they aren't were I expect to end up. I expect to end up at a clear picture of what is. The true nature.

    And still this discussion isn't revealing of what really goes on. Bah! Unless perhaps the point of introverted intuition is to run through all of the coulds and mights and mays until you arrive at the will bes.

    Naturally, one does not run through all possibilities. One runs through the relevant possibilities. And relevance is determined by intuition itself. Subjectively so. This perhaps is where people want to insist on frameworks. How after all does one determine subjective relevance if not via frameworks? And yet this idea continues to "feel" wrong. I am fairly sure people want there to be frameworks and contexts because these things would be objectively assessable. This is their access to Ni. But it's not mine. Because... lo and behold...

    Introverted intuition is subjective.

    There aren't any objective moving parts. Or at least, as far as one's perception of the perception itself goes, there aren't.


    Which means.....
    Bellison uncorked a flood of horrible profanity, which, translated, meant, "This is extremely unusual."

    Boy meets Grr

  5. #345
    Banned Array
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    Will
    Posts
    5,929

    Default

    Ne is says is about possibilities and Ni is a timeless multidimensional perspective.

  6. #346
    ⒺⓉⒷ Array Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,374

    Default

    Funny; I was just planning to resurrect one of these Ni threads.

    I've been looking at a description I was given; which I was taking time to fully understand.

    But Ne was described as attempting to understand a situation in terms of a pattern; perceiving otherwise disparate external elements in terms of a larger arrangement that give them meaning.
    Ni was described as beginning with an existing arrangement of elements and inferring what's being left out; what the pattern doesn't take into account, what isn't being articulated. It involves looking at a trajectory of a premise and seeing where the evidence for it "wants" to go, and from that, what has been left out of the theory or where the trajectory doesn't work.
    That is what was said to be the "subjective" element (i.e. the "introverted" attitude), rather than a subjective pattern (which is how I was trying to understand it).
    It was compared to looking beyond where a map ends.

    Ne and Ni conflict because Ni is looking for what a theory isn't designed to classify and talk about, or even what it "must" leave out in order to remain intact. Hence, (as I notice) NJ's will often tend to be more skeptical of ideas us NP's will toss out.

    I imagine that might be a more refined Ni, and when it's shadow, then maybe it does come out more in terms of an internal negative pattern, because then, it's really just negatively filling in for Ne.

    So now, perhaps I could sum it up as:

    Ne comparing one [external] pattern to another
    Ni filling in an external pattern by comparing with an internal blueprint, (which shows what's been left out).
    APS Profile: Inclusion: e/w=1/6 (Supine) |Control: e/w=7/3 (Choleric) |Affection: e/w=1/9 (Supine)
    Ti 54.3 | Ne 47.3 | Si 37.8 | Fe 17.7 | Te 22.5 | Ni 13.4 | Se 18.9 | Fi 27.9

    Temperament (APS) from scratch -- MBTI Type from scratch
    Type Ideas

  7. #347
    Lyric Baritone Array Kierva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Enneagram
    3w4 sp/sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    2,434

    Default

    The way I see it is:

    Ni - what will be
    Ne - what could be

    In Psychological Types, there's a lot of the word "vision" being popped around. Also, this paragraph from Psychological types show my point about Ni being what will be:

    Since the unconscious is not just something that lies there, like a psychic caput mortuum, but is something that coexists and experiences inner transformations which are inherently related to general events, introverted intuition, through its perception of inner processes, gives certain data which may possess supreme importance for the comprehension of general occurrences: it can even foresee new possibilities in more or less clear outline, as well as the event which later actually transpires. Its prophetic prevision is to be explained from its relation to the archetypes which represent the law-determined course of all experienceable things.
    There is an orientation with time says Jung, about Ni.

    As for Ne, there's a lot of the word "possibilities" popped around. Also, this paragraph from Psychological types show my point about Ne being what could be:

    Whenever intuition predominates, a particular and unmistakable psychology presents itself. Because intuition is orientated by the object, a decided dependence upon external situations is discernible, but it has an altogether different character from the dependence of the sensational type. The intuitive is never to be found among the generally recognized reality values, but he is always present where possibilities exist. He has a keen nose for things in the bud pregnant with future promise. He can never exist in stable, long-established conditions of generally acknowledged though limited value: because his eye is constantly ranging for new possibilities, stable conditions have an air of impending suffocation.
    E2 - Eb4 - E5

  8. #348
    Senior Member Array the state i am in's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    MBTI
    infj
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    2,448

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RaptorWizard View Post
    Ne is says is about possibilities and Ni is a timeless multidimensional perspective.
    yeah, the experience of time is central. diachronic vs synchronic. linearity vs circularity (which then just becomes a timeless whole in its own kind of partial dimensionality).

    Ni = fractalization. an iterative, self-aggregation process that uses analogy to deduce the causes from the effects. it's feedback loops, the principles of emergent, organizational intelligence, of recursive hierarchy, of the functionalism of tautology that understands itself self-referentially as different circuits of language/meaning/universals/symbols territorialize packets of self-description/particulars/information. it's an identification with the conditions of possibility, the conditions of perception, the conditions of information (the communicative context that emerges to bind social spaces and constrain patterns of interaction into evolving algorithms that are then woven into emergent algorithms at other orders).

  9. #349
    Happy Dancer Array uumlau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    953 sp/so
    Posts
    5,715

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    Funny; I was just planning to resurrect one of these Ni threads.

    I've been looking at a description I was given; which I was taking time to fully understand.

    But Ne was described as attempting to understand a situation in terms of a pattern; perceiving otherwise disparate external elements in terms of a larger arrangement that give them meaning.
    Ni was described as beginning with an existing arrangement of elements and inferring what's being left out; what the pattern doesn't take into account, what isn't being articulated. It involves looking at a trajectory of a premise and seeing where the evidence for it "wants" to go, and from that, what has been left out of the theory or where the trajectory doesn't work.
    That is what was said to be the "subjective" element (i.e. the "introverted" attitude), rather than a subjective pattern (which is how I was trying to understand it).
    It was compared to looking beyond where a map ends.

    Ne and Ni conflict because Ni is looking for what a theory isn't designed to classify and talk about, or even what it "must" leave out in order to remain intact. Hence, (as I notice) NJ's will often tend to be more skeptical of ideas us NP's will toss out.

    I imagine that might be a more refined Ni, and when it's shadow, then maybe it does come out more in terms of an internal negative pattern, because then, it's really just negatively filling in for Ne.

    So now, perhaps I could sum it up as:

    Ne comparing one [external] pattern to another
    Ni filling in an external pattern by comparing with an internal blueprint, (which shows what's been left out).
    This is good. Ne is very much comparing external patterns and Ni compares reality (Te or Fe or Se) with an internal pattern.

    It leaves out, however, the qualitative differences between Ne and Ni: Ne sees its external patterns in terms of internal Si standards. Ne sees the Si box, and yearns to go outside of it (thus it is external). Ni generates its internal standards based on observed Se experiences: it tries to find which "box" best explains the Se observations.

    Another side effect is that because Ne sees things in Si standards, the Ne patterns are remarkably static, and conversely the Ni patterns based on Se are remarkably dynamic.

    It might be simplistically described as Ne looks for correlation while Ni looks for causation.

    This doesn't mean that Ni is somehow "better" (it can get the cause wrong), but that it's one of the points where Ne and Ni have crosstalk. Ne points out the correlations that Ni tends to dismiss because they lack any context of cause and effect, while Ni points out the cause and effect that Ne tends to dismiss because there is no established pattern to support it.

    This is also why Ni will seem very mysterious to non-Ni types: even the Ne types are unconsciously bound to the notion that a pattern needs to be established and certain in order to accept the conclusions it provides, so the Ni observation based on patterns of cause-and-effect seems out of the blue, and they're even more amazing when they're right (betting against the odds and winning).
    An argument is two people sharing their ignorance.

    A discussion is two people sharing their understanding, even when they disagree.

  10. #350
    i love Array skylights's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 so/sx
    Socionics
    EII Ne
    Posts
    7,836

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    This is also why Ni will seem very mysterious to non-Ni types: even the Ne types are unconsciously bound to the notion that a pattern needs to be established and certain in order to accept the conclusions it provides, so the Ni observation based on patterns of cause-and-effect seems out of the blue, and they're even more amazing when they're right (betting against the odds and winning).
    Interesting. Can you give an example of this?

Page 35 of 92 FirstFirst ... 2533343536374585 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. [INTJ] What the hell is an INTJ?
    By Haphazard in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 12-07-2012, 06:04 PM
  2. Naomi Klein: What the hell is her problem, anyway?
    By pure_mercury in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-21-2009, 05:37 PM
  3. What the hell is going on in this picture?
    By RiderOnTheStorm in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 47
    Last Post: 06-08-2009, 01:52 AM
  4. What the hell is going on? (Conspiracy)
    By Fluffywolf in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 05-02-2009, 07:10 AM
  5. Replies: 11
    Last Post: 04-28-2009, 12:55 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •