User Tag List

First 3456715 Last

Results 41 to 50 of 376

Thread: Ne/Ni Conflicts

  1. #41
    nee andante bechimo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    8,028

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Uytuun View Post
    Yes, we suck when we are bound.

    (no pun intended!)
    Very, very true but Ne users also suck when their Fe gets in the way and they're set on alignment their way. Flex with me is different from flex my way.

  2. #42
    Glycerine
    Guest

    Default

    Other than my last two posts, I don't see too much conflict between Ne/Ni. It's interesting though that I get along with NTPs, ENTJs and SFPs a little better than NFPs in relation to the N + judging function perspective.

  3. #43
    Happy Dancer uumlau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    953 sp/so
    Posts
    5,708

    Default

    Considering that Highlander is using a quote of mine to start the discussion, I should perhaps chime in.

    Overall I've observed the following:

    • Te/Fi vs Fe/Ti seem to generate the most misunderstanding and agitation, since they determine what kind of conclusions one believes to be reasonable.
    • N vs S doesn't generate misunderstandings so much as a degree of incompatibility, as the interests of each can differ significantly.
    • Ni vs Ne generates some mild incompatibility (the "myopic" observation), but generally get along as usually both parties tend to appreciate what the other sees.


    There is actually a slightly stronger aspect of the Ni vs Ne difference which is an interesting conflict between Ni and Si. As I explained in another thread that I don't care to look up right now, while Ne endeavors to look outside the box, seeing the box as "way over there" while one's thoughts are "way over here," Ni instead makes new boxes and tries out lots of different boxes. Due to its association with Si, Si sees a single box, or an array or grid of boxes. The boxes, as Si, don't subjectively change, but are experienced as being rather concrete.

    At an extreme level, older, very experienced and smart INTPs tend to have very "Si-specific" ideas about everything they know, and it's hard for a new idea to find its way in if it is perceived to contradict what is already known. Einstein is a very good example of this. In spite of making the second major breakthrough in quantum mechanics (describing the photoelectric effect), his attitude toward most quantum mechanics research of his time was very reactionary. He just couldn't believe that it was truly that random. (Of course, he never had the benefit of Feynman's quantum electrodynamics predict quantum behavior to one part in a billion, which is absurdly accurate for most deterministic physics experiments, never mind something as "random" as quantum mechanics.)

    I would suggest that the Ne/Si attitude is along the lines of always searching for something new (Ne), and that as one learns and gathers new information, it gradually becomes "old" (Si), and is regarded as a known fact.

    The Ni/Se attitude differs in that the external world is regarded as an ongoing input of empirical data (Te, Fe, Se), and that one has to continually adjust one's own perspective (Ni) in order to make sense of the whole.

    Ni (in an INTJ for example) can still be just as stubborn as the INTP's Ti/Si "matrix", but is of a very different nature, where it exists. Ni tends to combine with the extroverted judging function and intimidate those around into backing away from arguments, which is an ironic tendency because Ni very much desires the dialectic debate and contest of ideas. Also, Ni has often made some very odd subjective assumptions which may be entirely correct, but it can be extremely difficult for others to figure out how to analyze and poke at those assumptions, especially if those others don't have Ni.

    Having observed many INTJ/INTP conversations about complex theoretical topics, I've noted that the INTP will work toward finding common definitions (Si), while the INTJ will work toward finding a common frame or perspective (Ni). This can work out badly (or, more likely, just require a LOT more work) in those cases where the Ni perspective involves several very-slightly-different definitions from a given standard Si perspective.

    For an intuitive understanding of the prior paragraph, consider a typical color selection UI which isn't just a list of standard colors, but the entire spectrum from red to purple, light to dark:


    The Ni approach is analogous to saying "that color" and clicking the one spot on that grid and sliding the shading bar on the right to just the right shade. Below this UI, there are a bunch of boxes that list the intensity of each of Red, Green and Blue, with specific values from 0-255. [The Hue, Sat, and Lum values are a dependent set of values that describe the same color as the Red, Green and Blue values - a completely different definition in a different frame, describing the same thing, and in fact map directly to the horizontal, vertical and sidebar positions of the cursors. Very Ni.] This list of values is analogous to the Ti/Si definition of color. So Ni wants to adjust the perspective such that it is a slightly lighter shade of lavender, but over in Si-data-point land, it involves tweaking each color definition by a very fixed and precise amount, say Red +2, Blue -3 and Green +4. So the Ni perspective will see a very simple tweak that "makes everything work out", but this involves changing all three definitions of which the INTP is keeping careful track.

    Thus it can require a lot of feedback between both parties to achieve both the proper definitional agreements and perspective agreements. Once the agreements are achieved, then the ideas tend to bounce around between the two far more cooperatively.

    As for whether this is the INTP's Ne/Si, or really "just Ti", watch the precision with which INFPs (Fi, Ne, Si, Te) state their ideas, and how nitpicky they get when a description is ever-so-slightly off, in their estimation. It's the same Ne/Si in play. I don't see similar evidence of such behavior from ISTPs or ISFPs.

    EDIT: To give credit where credit is due, much of my observations I make here were originally noted by Orobas, and I've gotten a very good feel for where these Ni/Si issues come into play due to several long, in-person conversations with her. Since she is Ne/Fi/Te/Si, I share the Te/Fi but not the Ne/Si, so where we have issues sharing ideas, it appears when I keep on presenting hypotheses that seem to "tear down" her rather fixed Fi/Si notion of how things work, and rebuild something brand new in its place. The compromise between the two perspectives is aided by noting that the new construction is entirely temporary, unless it is actually better.

  4. #44
    Administrator highlander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/sp
    Socionics
    ILI Ni
    Posts
    17,912

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Metaphor View Post
    Very, very true but Ne users also suck when their Fe gets in the way and they're set on alignment their way. Flex with me is different from flex my way.
    Of course, there are Ne types that prefer Fi

    Please provide feedback on my Nohari and Johari Window by clicking here: Nohari/Johari

    Tri-type 639

  5. #45
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    25,301

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Metaphor View Post
    Very, very true but Ne users also suck when their Fe gets in the way and they're set on alignment their way. Flex with me is different from flex my way.
    But see here - this is a problem with Fe, mostly. Wouldn't have that problem with an NFP. I'm just sayin'.

  6. #46
    nee andante bechimo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    8,028

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by marmalade.sunrise View Post
    But see here - this is a problem with Fe, mostly. Wouldn't have that problem with an NFP. I'm just sayin'.
    Don't get me started on NFPs!

    While I like NFPs in general, there can be some real disconnects due to decision-making process differences.

    Cognitive processes don't happen in a vacuum.

  7. #47
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    25,301

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Metaphor View Post
    Don't get me started on NFPs!

    While I like NFPs in general, there can be some real disconnects due to decision-making process differences.

    Cognitive processes don't happen in a vacuum.
    Well you're gonna have disconnects with anybody. Even people of your own type can get on your nerves. It's just all about recognizing the differences and working through them because you understand them because you know their type.

  8. #48
    Glycerine
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Metaphor View Post
    Don't get me started on NFPs!

    While I like NFPs in general, there can be some real disconnects due to decision-making process differences.

    Cognitive processes don't happen in a vacuum.
    These are only the negatives. From my experience,They have a really hard time deciding on things or their Ne is so ingenious and brilliant ideas that its the best way. As a result, they will bulldoze others with Fi and Te to get their way.

  9. #49
    Superwoman Red Herring's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sp/sx
    Posts
    5,648

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    Having observed many INTJ/INTP conversations about complex theoretical topics, I've noted that the INTP will work toward finding common definitions (Si), while the INTJ will work toward finding a common frame or perspective (Ni). This can work out badly (or, more likely, just require a LOT more work) in those cases where the Ni perspective involves several very-slightly-different definitions from a given standard Si perspective.

    For an intuitive understanding of the prior paragraph, consider a typical color selection UI which isn't just a list of standard colors, but the entire spectrum from red to purple, light to dark:


    The Ni approach is analogous to saying "that color" and clicking the one spot on that grid and sliding the shading bar on the right to just the right shade. Below this UI, there are a bunch of boxes that list the intensity of each of Red, Green and Blue, with specific values from 0-255. [The Hue, Sat, and Lum values are a dependent set of values that describe the same color as the Red, Green and Blue values - a completely different definition in a different frame, describing the same thing, and in fact map directly to the horizontal, vertical and sidebar positions of the cursors. Very Ni.] This list of values is analogous to the Ti/Si definition of color. So Ni wants to adjust the perspective such that it is a slightly lighter shade of lavender, but over in Si-data-point land, it involves tweaking each color definition by a very fixed and precise amount, say Red +2, Blue -3 and Green +4. So the Ni perspective will see a very simple tweak that "makes everything work out", but this involves changing all three definitions of which the INTP is keeping careful track.

    Thus it can require a lot of feedback between both parties to achieve both the proper definitional agreements and perspective agreements. Once the agreements are achieved, then the ideas tend to bounce around between the two far more cooperatively..
    Great illustration and *sigh* all too true, I think.
    The good life is one inspired by love and guided by knowledge. Neither love without knowledge, nor knowledge without love can produce a good life. - Bertrand Russell
    A herring's blog
    Johari / Nohari

  10. #50
    Sniffles
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    Having observed many INTJ/INTP conversations about complex theoretical topics, I've noted that the INTP will work toward finding common definitions (Si), while the INTJ will work toward finding a common frame or perspective (Ni). This can work out badly (or, more likely, just require a LOT more work) in those cases where the Ni perspective involves several very-slightly-different definitions from a given standard Si perspective.
    That's a very good way of putting it. As a Ni-dom, I often have difficulty giving precise definitions for complex concepts, and instead focus more on a proper paradigm on which to best understand the concept in question. This happens a lot when I'm asked to define something like religion, and I often note the difficulty in doing so since there's so many variations of it. Or even currently my discussions concerning definitions of fascism in the generic sense.

Similar Threads

  1. What's the difference between Ne/Ni doms and Ne/Ni auxiliaries?
    By Esoteric Wench in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 04-16-2012, 02:10 PM
  2. Pictorial Guide to the Ne/Ni Distinction (the pics in no particular order this time)
    By Mal12345 in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 08-26-2011, 05:02 PM
  3. Se, Si, Ne, Ni ( HOBBIES)
    By liYA in forum Popular Culture and Type
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 11-01-2010, 09:15 AM
  4. Ne/Ni Jungian Cognitive Function Interaction
    By InvisibleJim in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 104
    Last Post: 09-28-2010, 02:56 AM
  5. Explanation for SJs dislike of change [Si vs Ne/Ni/Se]
    By Snow Turtle in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 09-23-2008, 06:37 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
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO