User Tag List

First 56789 Last

Results 61 to 70 of 102

  1. #61
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    STP
    Posts
    10,501

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by onemoretime View Post
    I'm of the opinion that the other person's functional traits are irrelevant; we all have to develop ourselves to be able to coexist with all kinds of people.
    yes but recognizing when another person is in different stages will help you adapt to that person and coexist. Its part of a perception trait.

    edit: it came across as if we shouldnt learn others only ourself.

  2. #62
    can't handcuff the wind Z Buck McFate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    3,692

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by highlander View Post
    - steps back and looks at the bigger picture; seems to synthesize a lot of things and communicates a perspective based on those things
    - provides depth of insight on a problem with an orientation towards what is going to happen in the future
    - tends to be conceptual in nature
    I strongly agree with the first point. That’s how I see it as it works in me anyway. But I’ve always had a problem understanding the ‘future’ orientation that Ni is supposed to have. The only way I can figure ‘future’ into it is if I apply it in terms of constantly thinking of ways to improve things, which- since any improvements will affect future outcomes- affects the future I guess. But I largely don’t see Ni as predicting events so much as pointing out what’s wrong in the present system/structure.

    Quote Originally Posted by proteanmix View Post
    If I'm a Ni-aux, I don't feel like Ni is impossible to explain, communicate, or understand. The way I experience Pi (and like I said I don't know whether this is descriptive of Si or Ni) it's like a digital signature. [b]I don't ever believe the encryption is impossible to break or decode, it's just up to the person to decide how far willing they are to decode it. When I try to decode and communicate, I'm very adamant about finding evidence to support myself.[b] I don't want to come across as a loose cannon, pulling things out of the air without any support for why I believe what I believe. I don't feel like that's a way to establish trust with people and I certainly don't expect anyone to trust or believe me on some unverifiable hunch or belief, or hell strong delusion that only I can see. This ain't the movies, if someone says, "Just trust me on this," my automatic response is "Why should I?"
    Exactly. It’s incredibly difficult at times, but I firmly feel the onus to provide clear proof for what I sense. I’ve got a pretty short fuse with people who insist they’re right without being willing to do the work of figuring out how to provide a reasonable explanation for why they arrived at the conclusions they did. I don’t expect anyone to believe me without doing that work myself. It is astoundingly difficult at times, it isn't linear- but it is traceable- so it’s a matter of going in and rearranging the information into a linear fashion to make it presentable to others. This is why I agree with what others have said, earlier in the thread, that it’s infinitely easier to work through things with other Ni folk. I might perceive a problem with Y- and unless I’m with someone else who thinks in the same non-linear way- I’ll have to do the work of setting up A through X before explaining the problem. And if the problem with Y is really bothering me, then I’ll be too distracted to figure out how to set up A through X first- and I just flat out won’t make sense to most people.


    Quote Originally Posted by cascadeco View Post
    ^ I've always maintained on these boards that Ni IS traceable and that I can explain my thoughts/perceptions/opinions if I really wanted to. For myself, it can be hard to verbalize it, and nearly impossible sometimes to articulate on-the-spot if I'm asked to, say, explain my views on religion (I like to use that as an example because to fully explain WHY I've concluded what I've concluded, it would involve articulating 70 pages of single-space writing that I wrote at one time, and that writing itself isn't organized in a way that would be presentable - all of the 'pieces' are there, but I haven't connected them. For me, the sum of the pieces = my vague statement, as they automatically tie in my mind, but to explain them together, in a more logical format - to others - would be more challenging). But complex topics aside, generally it's why I prefer the written format vs. talking - it's just easier because I have all the time I need to gather and present what's in my mind - in far more detail than I tend to give in speaking. But yeah - if asked, I'll do my best to explain, always.

    Sometimes I am not immediately aware of why I feel or think the way I do, but yeah, if I spend time I can figure out why and articulate that. But, sometimes for me it can take TIME to sort through all of that, and it may too involve a good number of questions if I realize I am in need of more information.

    But I hate, hate the whole 'voodoo' association with Ni. It's not magic. I think for Ni-doms especially though, the articulation piece is a little more challenging, and with some, there might therefore be a tendency towards laziness or just 'not seeing a point' in articulating all of the details. But to be fair too, I think a lot of times our vague statements or assertions seem 'Obvious' and we forget that it's not obvious others, or we might wrongly assume it's not necessary to explain everything that led us up to the assertion, because we might think others will have made all of the steps we made in our heads to get there. Or something.

    Also, for myself at least, I need *reasons* for thinking or believing what I believe. If things don't make sense, if there isn't logic there, if it isn't supported by reality, I won't believe it in the first place. I don't believe or think 'just because' or without substantiation. That's almost abhorrent to me. So I don't just pull things out of thin air. I might have a nagging something-or-other that starts things off, but I then dig and figure out what's going on and go from there. So in my head I have reasons; the disconnect is my maybe not automatically articulating this stuff -- but this is what I described above.
    +1 to all of this. As it applies to the op, the part about not always recognizing when some connection is obvious is a pretty big obstacle. In other words- about picking up on when someone is using Ni- we can make statements that seem to make no damn sense. The comparison Jennifer made to seeing a train car- without being able to figure out where it came from because there aren’t any tracks in sight- describes it pretty well. Even when I put effort into making it presentable, I often have trouble discerning what connections most people do or do not see on their own.

    Also, this:

    Quote Originally Posted by proteanmix View Post
    The way I think I pick up on someone is using Ni is I feel like they're searching more. I tend to more easily identify the "digger/searcher Ni" than the "mystical/magical Ni." I'm a Battlestar Galactica geek and there was a storyline with Lucy Lawless's character D'anna. She kept shooting herself in the head in order to catch glimpses of the Final Five. She absolutely would not stop until she figured out who they were. Each time she killed herself and downloaded into a new body, it was more and more painful but she had to know who they were. It wasn't enough for her to just have the vision once and believe what she saw. She didn't necessarily think what she saw was untrue, but she needed more confirmation. I contrast this with Laura Roslin who had the vision once and didn't need to constantly revisit it in order to believe, it was seared into her the first time.
    I tend to apply incoming information to ‘the forest’ instead of just ‘the trees’ in front of me. I don’t just apply it to the situation at hand. [I'm not trying to milk the 'big picture' shtick here that gets overused (and poorly explained) in N/S discussions; I get as annoyed as anyone when others use 'big picture' in a manner that resembles ego stroking/poor attempts at 'discrediting' the other side more than actual clarification.] It’s my default to instantly wonder if there are situations where the information doesn’t apply, or if it applies differently- and if it applies differently I think about how/why context changes it. An oversimplified example: if someone says, “You shouldn’t take candy from a baby”, then “What if s/he’s choking?” will instantly pop into my head. This isn’t something I do consciously, I don’t look for exceptions to the rule, but I’ll sort of feel something tugging on my sleeve whispering ‘What about this?’ as I take in information. So my attention gets pulled to the side while I figure out what ‘this’ is. A serious downside is that I have trouble seeing 'the trees' in front of me the way most people do. I'm forever distracted by something. And I misunderstand things constantly because 'What else could this mean?' interferes with me getting the interpretation of information that most people seem to automatically understand. It's like there's some social gluent that holds people together that I can't seem to grasp sometimes.
    Reality is a collective hunch. -Lily Tomlin

    5w4 sx/sp Johari / Nohari

  3. #63
    Senior Member sciski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    NSFW
    Enneagram
    6w7
    Posts
    468

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IZthe411 View Post
    I know this guy- a public speaker. When he speaks, people say he goes all over the place with his points, but when he brings it home, it all makes sense. He wraps it up neatly (well, sometimes). That's Ni. I love how he takes seemingly unrelated things and is able to make connections, or use them to support his conclusions. Sometimes as he's setting up his points, I'm able to make the connection before he actually says it. Not that I am using Ni, but at least my Si ability helps me to follow what he's saying and build right along with him, not look at him with the face.
    I'm not sure if this is Ni. Isn't 'making seemingly unrelated connections' an Ne thing? Ne is about being able to see the patterns and connections that are out there in the world, waiting to be found--those really highly skilled at it can see the patterns that most of us don't look for, hence the points seem unrelated until the links are made explicit by the person who sees them.

    Ni is more like a scalpel that shoots through single concepts (that can include a conception of an entire situation), trying to get to the core truth or 'correctness' of the concept. You could possibly think of it as extreme, deliberate skepticism (different from when an Ne user is just playing devil's advocate to generate more ideas). This is possibly why people shoot eye lasers when using Ni... in a way, they do cut into whatever they are thinking about. It's like trying to see through lots of fluff and obscuring objects to get to the truth of something... like trying to see a solid scaffold that is encased in moving mist. Ni shoots the laser to cut through the mist. When you finally see the scaffold, there is the "Aha!" moment. Ni breaks down, Ne connects.

    Of course, your public speaker could still be using Ni predominantly, but I suspect your example is showing his Ne... and your ability to follow along makes sense as you use Si/Ne. My husband is the same... strong Si/Ne. He sometimes wonders why I can be slow to connect the dots and I wonder why he is so slow to see the truth behind what is apparently the truth. I'm talking what seems to be absolute, subjective truth.

    I also relate to Protean's description... Ni is like a little ferret that digs and digs and digs until it finds what it needs to find. I don't think the process itself is unconscious, but it is somewhat unbidden, and hard to explain because at the end of the process, all you have is dirt scattered everywhere, a bunch of holes with only one that led to the correct thought, and a very tired ferret.

    I am probably ISFP, so may be describing tertiary Ni, but I don't use Ni to connect the dots... Connecting dots gets in the way of seeing the truth. That would be like the ferret digging holes while clipping clotheslines to the bottom of each hole so that they're all dragging behind it as it digs. Each new line would just increase the chances of tripping up the ferret.

    Anyway, to see it in action... one clue, I think, is the breaking off into thought partway through a talk... or a long pause while they think things through, and then the next thing they say is the new idea or perception that seems to come out of nowhere. I guess that's because it actually has NO link with anything, and that's why it comes out of nowhere. I suspect that any explanatory links are generated subsequently in an attempt to make the Ni idea more palatable/understandable to others.

    Anyhow, that's my take. I am open to the possibility that I am describing entirely different processes and just have been ferreting down the wrong hole.

  4. #64
    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 Craft View Post
    Eyes. Literally. Physically. "Piercing" and "Beady" might be good to describe it. But I am not sure.
    I think I may have done this with somebody that I interviewed today for a job. We need people and I wanted to find reasons to hire him. I was working very hard to get him to explain what he did to support the words on his resume. It had to be difficult for him because at the end of the day, he put together a really nice combination of words that were appealing on his resume but he didn't have the experience to back it up. There was a lot of spin. It must have been uncomfortable. I don't feel too bad though because he put down these things and I was simply trying to understand what he actually did. When he didn't answer the questions, I continued to probe. So, I look off to the side while I'm formulating these penetrating and relentless questions, then hone in on him and allow him to respond. I think I'd be uncomfortable on the other end of that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    Yeah, I do a lot better with Ni people who can reverse-engineer/explicate their vision via a reasoning process, and then I get it and feel like they get me. But otherwise in the worst situations it's like seeing a train appear in the middle of a desert without any tracks. How did that get there? Why did it get there?
    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post

    The point of my post is that, to Ni, it isn't always clear that the Ni-observations require explanation. It's obvious, after all.
    Quote Originally Posted by Z Buck McFate View Post
    It is astoundingly difficult at times, it isn't linear- but it is traceable- so it’s a matter of going in and rearranging the information into a linear fashion to make it presentable to others.
    I actually don't think it is very traceable. Why? There are too many data points. They are correlated mostly unconsciously. They aren't going to make a lot of sense to other people even if you could pull them all out.

    It might seem like it is reverse engineering or explaining the rationale but it is not. For an Ni Dom, we're primarily using the auxiliary. It is 1) like a counter-balance to an irrational perception and 2) a means by which the message is packaged up in a way to be understandable and meaningful to the outside world.

    Quote Originally Posted by Z Buck McFate View Post
    I strongly agree with the first point. That’s how I see it as it works in me anyway. But I’ve always had a problem understanding the ‘future’ orientation that Ni is supposed to have. The only way I can figure ‘future’ into it is if I apply it in terms of constantly thinking of ways to improve things, which- since any improvements will affect future outcomes- affects the future I guess. But I largely don’t see Ni as predicting events so much as pointing out what’s wrong in the present system/structure.
    You're right. I do this too. I can pick apart almost anything - look for flaws or things to improve. It is very much about future outcomes though as you said which, well, is the future. So you don't predict what will happen? You're not looking for ways to to head off future problems?

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

    Tri-type 639

  5. #65
    Plumage and Moult proteanmix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Enneagram
    1w2
    Posts
    5,514

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by highlander View Post
    I think I may have done this with somebody that I interviewed today for a job. We need people and I wanted to find reasons to hire him. I was working very hard to get him to explain what he did to support the words on his resume. It had to be difficult for him because at the end of the day, he put together a really nice combination of words that were appealing on his resume but he didn't have the experience to back it up. There was a lot of spin. It must have been uncomfortable. I don't feel too bad though because he put down these things and I was simply trying to understand what he actually did. When he didn't answer the questions, I continued to probe. So, I look off to the side while I'm formulating these penetrating and relentless questions, then hone in on him and allow him to respond. I think I'd be uncomfortable on the other end of that.
    I think the bolded was your trigger. You suspected spin, that something was amiss. What was that something?
    Relationships have normal ebbs and flows. They do not automatically get better and better when the participants learn more and more about each other. Instead, the participants have to work through the tensions of the relationship (the dialectic) while they learn and group themselves and a parties in a relationships. At times the relationships is very open and sharing. Other time, one or both parties to the relationship need their space, or have other concerns, and the relationship is less open. The theory posits that these cycles occur throughout the life of the relationship as the persons try to balance their needs for privacy and open relationship.
    Interpersonal Communication Theories and Concepts
    Social Penetration Theory 1
    Social Penetration Theory 2
    Social Penetration Theory 3

  6. #66
    FRACTALICIOUS phobik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    7,375

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by raminda View Post
    I think my most obvious observations of Ni in my boyfriend (an INTJ) is in his explanations of his most fundamental opinions. As an example, he holds the opinion that when it comes to looks, what people should strive for is to have their "outer self" look as much as their "true, inner self" as possible. The closer someone is to this goal, the more beautiful they are. (I think this could indicate Fi too, though.) As a contrast, I, with Ne, aim to not get stuck in a specific "look" but be everchanging.

    I'm not saying that this is an opinion that could only be held by people with Ni, or that all people with Ni holds it, but rather that the choice of the words he uses when he explains it is. Someone else could say "People are beautiful when they look like they want to look." and it'd basically be the same thing, but the fact that he chooses an expression like "true, inner self" is indicative of Ni.

    I’m not sure if that even made sense. Ah, well.
    No, not really. But we get that you are deeply infatuated in love.

  7. #67
    ThatGirl
    Guest

    Default

    I have the ability to spot an Ni user from across the room. From a comparison perspective it seems very familiar to me. Ni was a trait I always recognized in others without knowing why.

    If you think about it, the familiarity comes from the understanding of someone else weaving through their world, much in the same way you do. Ni users seem to stick out like a sore thumb, to me, since not everyone acts from the same functions. I am familiar with it, so I see it.

    I was joking to a friend one time who was watching me pour a fountain drink, which I filled up to the fullest extent while allowing for a lid, and not overflowing, in one shot. He laughed, “Nice pour!” I told him “That’s how you know someone is an NT.”

    When asked why that would mean someone is an Nt, I responded that most of the sensory things which are often thought about, NTs didn’t just ignore them, they thought about them, then they thought about more.

    Little sensory perfections, and big dumb intuitions are more a sign of an intuitive than someone who walks around pretending like they are autistic.

    Now, that is N (with a T thing). In difference between Ne and Ni, I am going to start from my own comparison of interactions.

    Ne seems to jump out at me out of nowhere. It is startling even if in a good way. During a conversation with an Ne user, you never have an idea of the direction it is taking. It is choppy, and goes in loops. One min you are heading in this direction, the next the position has changed.

    I find Ne fun. A lot of fun. At times though I find it hard or annoying to try to keep up, unless I am really in a mood. It is …hyper N. Usually when Ne startles me, it snaps me out of attention to whatever I was thinking about like…..screeeech…..?.... Then I think about it for a second, and Lol.

    Ni works a little differently. It is familiar to me, like I said I can spot it across the room, and I have very rarely been wrong. It is in everything they do. The way they carry themselves, the way they interact with others. The subtleties. Like someone said, they are big picture thinkers, have the ability to take a step back and analyze the situation.

    An example would be, an Ni user who wants to appear attractive will more likely take on a confident walk than douse the shit out of their eyes with excessive make up.

    Maybe that example does not ring true for all Ni users (remember I have Se in there somewhere), but the point is that you can recognize them by acting upon base theory, more so than projecting out a certain commonly held way of being.

    They are less likely to do something categorized as the common “effect” to cause a specific "reaction". They get the same reaction, and stay on step, but from a more, base-core, philosophy or refined understanding.

    Unless they are crazy, then they just default into “nothing is true, the world is shit” type mentalities.

    To sum it up, Ni users seem to operate from a deeper yet simpler state of mind. They can refine to fit a certain situation, but even that will be because they have the ability to see how they must be in order to maximize the possibilities of the situation. Yet this understanding is from a deeper philosophy which isn’t as easily swayed surface influences.

  8. #68
    FRACTALICIOUS phobik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    7,375

    Default

    We need. smaller. character. limits.

  9. #69
    can't handcuff the wind Z Buck McFate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    3,692

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by highlander View Post
    I actually don't think it is very traceable. Why? There are too many data points. They are correlated mostly unconsciously. They aren't going to make a lot of sense to other people even if you could pull them all out.

    It might seem like it is reverse engineering or explaining the rationale but it is not. For an Ni Dom, we're primarily using the auxiliary. It is 1) like a counter-balance to an irrational perception and 2) a means by which the message is packaged up in a way to be understandable and meaningful to the outside world.
    I don't know about anyone else, but that's^ kinda what I meant by making it presentable: finding just enough data points to effectively demonstrate there's a solid reason for the conclusion I've arrived at. I won't spit out a conclusion and expect others to believe me if I can't come up with at least a few of the data points that led me there. I'm able to believe it myself before I can articulate it, but I don't expect anyone else to believe I *magically* know things. I'm wondering if the disjunction here is that I'm talking about conclusions involving people mostly (Fe aux), whereas maybe you're talking about something else?



    You're right. I do this too. I can pick apart almost anything - look for flaws or things to improve. It is very much about future outcomes though as you said which, well, is the future. So you don't predict what will happen? You're not looking for ways to to head off future problems?
    This is maybe nit-picking on my part. It's just that it doesn't seem future oriented to me. It's kind of like- I see a system, then a notice a flaw in the system, I speculate on why it doesn't work/what might work better then I think 'hey, I should apply this!' Like I said, I can see how it affects the future- but it doesn't start with thinking 'how can I make this better for future application?' It starts with me noticing something that isn't working in the present system. Probably totally splitting hairs here though.
    Reality is a collective hunch. -Lily Tomlin

    5w4 sx/sp Johari / Nohari

  10. #70
    Senior Member Jaguar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    12,444

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by phobik View Post
    We need. smaller. character. limits.

    No. shit.

Similar Threads

  1. Religious people - How would you go about converting someone?
    By EcK in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 11-18-2015, 05:50 PM
  2. [ENFJ] ENFJs: How would you like someone to tell you that they are in love with you?
    By rosemilk in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 02-04-2014, 05:22 PM
  3. How would you type someone who...
    By CunningLinguist in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-29-2009, 05:36 PM
  4. How do you figure out if someone is ENTP or ESTP?
    By KarenParker in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 07-04-2009, 03:30 PM
  5. [NT] how could/would you cheer up an INTP?
    By white in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 57
    Last Post: 12-03-2007, 03:03 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