User Tag List

First 2634353637384686 Last

Results 351 to 360 of 929

  1. #351
    Active Member Poki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    xSTP
    Posts
    9,435

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    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).
    Take what I say with a grain of salt, because that's all it is compared to the ocean of complexity when it comes to actions and real life.

  2. #352
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,400

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    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.
    Actually, what I was told was that the pattern Ne compares others to is one "stored in memory", so yes, an Si connection was implied; I left it out to try to make it as simple as possible, because that might give the impression that the intuition is introverted, and I also try to avoid associating "memory=Si"; but in that case, it would be the Ne and Si in tandem. And Ni's looking at an "existing arrangement of elements" (from which it infers "what's left out") would be its Se tandem connection.
    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

  3. #353
    Active Member Poki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    xSTP
    Posts
    9,435

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    Actually, what I was told was that the pattern Ne compares others to is one "stored in memory", so yes, an Si connection was implied; I left it out to try to make it as simple as possible, because that might give the impression that the intuition is introverted, and I also try to avoid associating "memory=Si"; but in that case, it would be the Ne and Si in tandem. And Ni's looking at an "existing arrangement of elements" (from which it infers "what's left out") would be its Se tandem connection.
    So what happens when that pattern is not found in memory?
    Take what I say with a grain of salt, because that's all it is compared to the ocean of complexity when it comes to actions and real life.

  4. #354
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,400

    Default

    If it's not stored in memory, it won't be used to compare to something else.
    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

  5. #355
    Happy Dancer uumlau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    953 sp/so
    Posts
    5,716

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by skylights View Post
    Interesting. Can you give an example of this?
    A possible example might be the "quants" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantitative_analyst) as an example of Ne/Si, vs a more "hands-on" approach to investing (Ni/Se). If you've not heard of "quants", they're the kind of people who came up with the infamous "derivatives" on mortgages to manage risk. (This isn't a knock on quantitative analysis, but it will highlight some of the flaws that can arise.)

    What quants essentially do is mathematically analyze everything that "has happened" in markets (Si), and then extrapolate patterns from that to make sound investment decisions. Such analysis is inherently statistical, and for the most part it works well. What's the missing piece? Cause and effect. The math is derived what historical examples, so, on average, they'll be right and tend to make money. Such models necessarily model trends, but they cannot model the changes in trends, because, well, the changes haven't happened yet.

    This is where Ni comes in: Ni looks at the same historical data that Ne/Si does, but instead of figuring out trends and handling special cases, Ni tries to internalize a "story" of how the changes take place. You can hear a simplistic version of this in stock market reports, where the newscaster says, "Stocks are up on news of <good market news>" or "Stocks are down on news of <bad market news>". (There is always good market news and bad market news, the story writers just insert the appropriate version of the "news" to "explain" why the market did well or poorly. And yes, this is a typical Ni (and Se) mistake, but Ni doms tend to make this mistake in less obvious ways.)

    So in this case, for example, Ni has a "story" model of how market bubbles work, and knows what market bubbles "look like" (Se). So analysts such as Peter Schiff (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_S...c_Policy_Views) see a housing bubble coming, even as most analysts do not. There are youtube videos where you can watch Schiff explain the coming crash to a bunch of skeptical fellow analysts, who scoff at his analysis. Why? There's nothing in the market data (Si) that says a crash is coming: everything is positive, people are making money, and there's plenty of room for growth.

    But Schiff looks at the same market data in an Ni way, and the data to him is a retelling of the "bubble story". He sees real estate prices going up not because people need and want more housing for themselves, but investors are buying housing only to resell it at a higher price. On top of that, he sees the highly-leveraged zero-down-payment, no-interest loans (basically, you "buy" a house by "renting" it) as a typical example of the kind of too-easy credit that fuels bubbles. In short, the "real price" of housing is how much a real person would pay to live in or otherwise use it for a productive purpose (renting apartments, as a business office, etc.), but turning housing into a commodity investment had raised the price of housing to levels far out of the range a typical buyer would be willing or able to pay. Eventually, we'd have people who'd paid too much for housing entirely unable to sell it without losing money. The core insight is that housing has a purpose, and the price of housing should reflect that purpose. If housing is costing far more than its purpose would indicate, and people are having to borrow more than they can realistically afford to pay for it, the bubble will burst and prices will go back to what people can afford.

    Keep in mind, a lot of this is very obvious in retrospect: the story has been told many times and has become part of the narrative of the crash four years ago. But in 2005, it was not obvious to most people or most analysts. And this is where Ni comes in: it takes these kinds of narratives and sees how they apply to other situations. For example, an Ni analyst might say that we can expect a higher education bubble, as tuition prices rise to levels that no one can afford and don't justify the employment one might expect to find with the degree achieved. Education has a purpose: if it starts costing so much that people have to borrow more than they can realistically afford to pay for it, the bubble will burst and prices will go back to what people can afford.

    I'm giving you this example showing Ni in a positive light because you requested it. The negative version of Ni would be using anecdotal evidence to arrive at incorrect conclusions, usually because the anecdote really doesn't contain the details necessary to apply it in general. In this positive case, it's still "anecdotal evidence" in that the reasoning is based off of "the asset bubble story", which isn't simply anecdotal evidence, but a fairly sophisticated cause-and-effect analysis.

    The Ne/Ni crosstalk comes from Ne habitually rejecting the Ni story-based reasoning as lacking supporting data, while Ni rejects the Ne analysis as overly reliant upon statistical correlation and trends. Both can be very sophisticated and intelligent - and both can even be right. But even when they're both right, Ne and Ni believe that they're right for different reasons. To Ne, the statistical analysis with lots of data is convincing. For Ni, the story, the understanding of the "how" is what is convincing.
    An argument is two people sharing their ignorance.

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

  6. #356
    ¤ Zarathustra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    7,739

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    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.
    Yeah, this is really just getting at the meta-perspectivizing that Ni does.

    The way I'v described it before is that we work "up the syllogism". What I mean by that is that we see, hear or read a conclusion, and then we start imagining the premises that would cause one to arrive at such a conclusion (and, it should be mentioned, that the possibilities we're able to come up with here tend to be limited, to some degree, by what we've come across in our lives [Se]), and then we evaluate whether such premises are true (via Fe/Te and/or Se), or whether we care about them (Fi/Ti[?]) and then we compare them against all the other premises we can imagine that would/could fit this scenario, and evaluate whether the conclusion stated and premises implied in the original construction are accurate in this case, the degree to which they're accurate, and (and here's where the part you were describing comes in) whether there are other premises that actually better fit the scenario, or that ought be taken into account in any comprehensive analysis of the issue at hand. These various sets of premises are the "boxes" that Ni is reputed for shifting between. Ne seeks to "get out of the box" (the box, in this case, having to do with Si, I believe [and, as such, while, in one sense, they seek to get out of the box {when suppressing Si, and "taking up" Ne}, in another sense, at other times {perhaps even at the same time?}, they seem to very much be comforted by, cling to, and depend upon the Si boxes they have stored in their subconscious]); Ni checks the various boxes on for "fit", shuffling between various options. As such, what you said at the end here very much rings true. NP types will often throw out possibilities based likely both on their (semi-[?])subconscious boxes, and their desire to reach outside of those boxes, and find new boxes that can eventually, if proven "worthy", be stored as "permanent boxes"; and, as an Ni user, when I watch them do this, sometimes they hit the nail on the head, or find a box that provides at least a partial explanation of the issue at hand, but, many other times, they seem to state these possibilities that, when they say them, it sounds like they're laying out this structure for these being the only possibilities, or the "core" possibilities, that are out there (admittedly, this is what it sounds like to me, not that, if asked, that they'd necessarily say, "these are the only possibilities to explain this phenomenon [although, in their defense of what they've allowed to become a permanent Si box, they often do have this defensive reaction, as that box is a bedrock of their psyche, and they do not like it to be tampered with {hence, the common NP complaint about about the alleged "shiftiness" or "unsettledness" or "lack of foundation" of NJs}]; they're probably just trying this new perspective on for size, breaking new ground, expanding their mental horizon out of their more settled-upon Si foundational box, possibly overstating its case in order to test whether it's something they could really believe [like trying on a novel {risky?} outfit in a fitting room {something which I think they often times enjoy, but sometimes might feel anxious about (especially if pressed on it?)}]), and I quickly examine it as one box, and then see a bunch of other boxes that could also fit the scenario, some just as well, if not much better, and I kinda just shake my head, and think to myself, "How does this person actually believe this? How could they actually find this a full/proper accounting of this issue??"

    / diving into my Ni hole
    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


  7. #357
    i love 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
    [...]
    I'm giving you this example showing Ni in a positive light because you requested it. The negative version of Ni would be using anecdotal evidence to arrive at incorrect conclusions, usually because the anecdote really doesn't contain the details necessary to apply it in general. In this positive case, it's still "anecdotal evidence" in that the reasoning is based off of "the asset bubble story", which isn't simply anecdotal evidence, but a fairly sophisticated cause-and-effect analysis.

    The Ne/Ni crosstalk comes from Ne habitually rejecting the Ni story-based reasoning as lacking supporting data, while Ni rejects the Ne analysis as overly reliant upon statistical correlation and trends. Both can be very sophisticated and intelligent - and both can even be right. But even when they're both right, Ne and Ni believe that they're right for different reasons. To Ne, the statistical analysis with lots of data is convincing. For Ni, the story, the understanding of the "how" is what is convincing.
    Awesome, uumlau, thank you so much for the explanation. That's a really fantastic example that gives me a good picture of the "perpendicular" lines that Ne and Ni run on, based on the way S points are interpreted, whether through definitional specifics / Si or directional indications / Se. Ni/Se and Ne/Si again remind me of Heisenberg uncertainty. It's so interestingly demonstrative of the "movement"/activity in Se data points, kind of more of an identification of a process, than Si's fixed archetypes that work on assessment of data.

    I alluded to my frustration at lacking Ni but being an enneagram 6 earlier in the thread because I feel like part of being a 6 is looking for those exact sorts of trends, and picking up on patterns that indicate the future. I've been in a management position at work recently and I've found myself trying to construct what seems to be the Ni story equivalent, but I often feel like I'm flying blind - I assume because my Se blows and I have a very hard time reading concrete situations for future indications. I know that the causation must be there, but it's hard for me to determine which patterns mean something. I'm probably trying to look along Ne lines again instead of Ni lines, but, for example, we have Thanksgiving coming this year, and I'm trying to decide how to gauge how I should shift production. Which things will we need more of, which less? My manager is a quintessential ISTJ and he is following last year's numbers to a T, because that is the guideline the company gives - it basically ensures he won't lose his job. Obviously, though, it's possible to do far better than that. The things that have occurred to me so far are mostly noting which items have been selling rapidly this season, but I feel like that's just more detailed Si data. I've been trying to look at elements like the weather being much colder, and people therefore probably leaning towards heavier and richer foods, the slow-but-improving economy suggesting lower numbers than usual but perhaps better than last year, the two new similar stores opening in our city and putting out more of what they don't have, which types of customers are most likely to come for this holiday and what they are most likely to buy (middle aged women tend to gravitate towards certain things, lol), which things we're going to put on sale and which things might increase/decrease in sales as a result of the price cuts, and so on... that's all I can think of right now


    But, as you can probably tell, all of this is painfully conscious for me, and probably laughably full of holes, while for you it's probably around the difficulty level of breathing Any advice?

    You guys should all become stock market gurus, you'd make a fortune

  8. #358
    Happy Dancer uumlau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    953 sp/so
    Posts
    5,716

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by skylights View Post
    Awesome, uumlau, thank you so much for the explanation. That's a really fantastic example that gives me a good picture of the "perpendicular" lines that Ne and Ni run on, based on the way S points are interpreted, whether through definitional specifics / Si or directional indications / Se. Ni/Se and Ne/Si again remind me of Heisenberg uncertainty. It's so interestingly demonstrative of the "movement"/activity in Se data points, kind of more of an identification of a process, than Si's fixed archetypes that work on assessment of data.

    I alluded to my frustration at lacking Ni but being an enneagram 6 earlier in the thread because I feel like part of being a 6 is looking for those exact sorts of trends, and picking up on patterns that indicate the future. I've been in a management position at work recently and I've found myself trying to construct what seems to be the Ni story equivalent, but I often feel like I'm flying blind - I assume because my Se blows and I have a very hard time reading concrete situations for future indications. I know that the causation must be there, but it's hard for me to determine which patterns mean something. I'm probably trying to look along Ne lines again instead of Ni lines, but, for example, we have Thanksgiving coming this year, and I'm trying to decide how to gauge how I should shift production. Which things will we need more of, which less? My manager is a quintessential ISTJ and he is following last year's numbers to a T, because that is the guideline the company gives - it basically ensures he won't lose his job. Obviously, though, it's possible to do far better than that. The things that have occurred to me so far are mostly noting which items have been selling rapidly this season, but I feel like that's just more detailed Si data. I've been trying to look at elements like the weather being much colder, and people therefore probably leaning towards heavier and richer foods, the slow-but-improving economy suggesting lower numbers than usual but perhaps better than last year, the two new similar stores opening in our city and putting out more of what they don't have, which types of customers are most likely to come for this holiday and what they are most likely to buy (middle aged women tend to gravitate towards certain things, lol), which things we're going to put on sale and which things might increase/decrease in sales as a result of the price cuts, and so on... that's all I can think of right now


    But, as you can probably tell, all of this is painfully conscious for me, and probably laughably full of holes, while for you it's probably around the difficulty level of breathing Any advice?

    You guys should all become stock market gurus, you'd make a fortune
    I'd suck at stock market stuff, unless I wrapped my life around it. When an Ni type "knows something", we are pretty much invested in knowing it, and are thus not expert in other areas.

    As far as doing your planning, I'd advise going the Ne/Si route, not by planning EXACTLY as last year (your ISTJ's approach), but by looking for the bigger trends, especially those for which you have significant data.

    The Ni/Se approach would be to look for shorter-term factors that would indicate more productive approaches. E.g., are there any commodities that you usually have to buy that are much cheaper this year? I was just reading that coffee prices are very low this year, but the people selling coffee (e.g., Starbucks) aren't going to lower their prices. That would suggest that you could perhaps attract business by having lower-cost coffee that tastes just as good as the expensive stuff (assuming you sell coffee at all, of course). In general, look at the market overall, look at current prices, see what's cheaper than normal, see what's more expensive than normal. The expensive stuff, even if it sells well, gives lower profit margins (think of car dealerships, which sell cars costing tens of thousands of dollars, but often only making a profit of a few hundred), while the cheaper stuff can yield some very high profit margins.

    Also note that anything that you change this year needs to be advertised, strongly. Customers are very habitual, so you have to say "We have new, cool stuff!" really loudly for them to even notice. You can also take a "venture capitalist" approach, whereby you take several gambles which will tend to lose money 9/10 times, but if one or two of them pay off, the profit more than pays for the losses. That lets you venture into newer and more interesting products, but not without risk.

    So yeah, look for the vectors, look for the changes, look for that which is neglected, and avoid trying to sell what everyone else is trying to sell.

    But remember this: I'm a software developer. I don't do market analysis. I can give ideas of what to look for, but I've no practice doing so myself. I just know that I'd be looking for the dynamic aspects of the system, looking for an ideal wave to surf (Se analogy), and maneuver to ride it. Sometimes there's no good wave to ride, in which case, you should just enjoy swimming and get what you can out of it, but keep an eye out for the wave, and know what the waves look like BEFORE they arrive.


    A link to the "coffee story": http://www.marketwatch.com/story/cof...cks-2012-11-08
    An argument is two people sharing their ignorance.

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

  9. #359

    Default

    Bookmarked second thread for when I feel like reading typology. Some great material in here.

  10. #360

    Default

    It's like having the ability to orgasm without any stimulation. *squirt*

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