Quote Originally Posted by Nocapszy View Post
No writer is ever successful then.

My question is, if the efforts are to find out what the author meant specifically, as differentiated from any other interpretation, (anaolgic, or symbolic) would it be more Ne or Ni?

I wrote the question poorly, you're right.
I think it could be both. Using Ne or Ni are just the processes by which one comes to their conclusions based on what's being observed, whether from others or for oneself.

I could see it as: Ne taking the info and going into the possibilities of what the author intended, being quick to connect ideas if familiar with the content. Ni taking the info and going into the possibilities of what the author intended but being more slower in connecting it, if not familiar with the content.

Generally, Ne is much faster with outside info than Ni unless Ni is familiar with the content. The difference is that Ne is much more flexible in maintaining differing POVs for what is thought to be intended or it just takes what it will to suit its need whereas Ni is more set in focusing into a conclusion of what was intended or it just takes what it will to suit its need. Edit: I should add that Ni can be much more faster (or even abrupt "Aha!") than Ne in understanding the intended meaning and coming to that conclusion if familiar with the content or there is a connection to something similar.

I also think that regardless of Ne or Ni it will still be one's interpretation of what was intended as objective material is always subjectively understood. Ne and Ni take from others in order to understand but you still come to your own conclusions based on that info or person or thing. Whether or not you find the same meaning as was intended for you to have, or you do find it but also create your own or more meanings as well, is entirely up to you using Ne or Ni. The only way to be certain is if you manage to speak to the person/author to see if you understood them correctly..

I wonder if I answered poorly.