Why is it difficult to describe Ni?

[garbage]

Do you too think we could ask burping cat for help ?

I think so.

Let me share a little Ni tidbit here, a koan which has guided me many times before. Something just 'clicked' the first time I read it.

Here it is:

One day Unsho visited Tanzan, who was drinking wine at the time, not even a drop of which is suppposed to touch the tongue of a Buddhist.

"Hello, brother," Tanzan greeted him. "Won't you have a drink?"

"I never drink!" exclaimed Unsho solemnly.

"One who does not drink is not even human," said Tanzan.

"Do you mean to call me inhuman just because I do not indulge in intoxicating liquids!" exclaimed Unsho in anger. "Then if I am not human, what am I?"

Burping cat then burped.

 

[Jaguar]

The best way I can describe it is "you see the thing that the other person just did? I was thinking the same thing" or "you think that conversation was random? It wasn't, and here's why..." It's the extension of thematic unity that describes it best.

I hear you.

 

[entropie]

That ruined my rep wall Jag Dunno it was possible to post pictures there, why havent one taught me earlier

 

[Jaguar]

That ruined my rep wall Jag Dunno it was possible to post pictures there, why havent one taught me earlier

I knew it would wake your ass up!

 

[garbage]

Okay, tying together replies to a few different posts here, so bear with me..

wait

Is the concept of just trying to tie a few of these questions into some overarching explanation that answers all of them an example how Ni works?

 

[cascadeco]

OK This is what I am being told.. In my first post.. I needed to imply that I was not joining the discussion in progress .. But rather answering the OP who is apparently an NI dom, asking why they are having trouble understanding their dominant function.. SO Apparently I posted about Ni in Ni terms and not simple succinct terms, so that only an Ni user would get what I was saying. And I was out of sequence.

This is well explained, and I understand why I seemed to be coming out of nowhere and confusing those who were in a discussion..

For this I apologize.. I assume people know what I am talking about. I was sticking to the OP.

I am also being told that I was being treated a tad rudely.. so meh!!! It's all good.

I don't think you need to apologize, but I'm sorry I came across rudely / was rude. I'm not able to keep my diplomacy covering intact all of the time , and in the end, I was attacking the ideas because I disagree with them. I can't really deny that. I know though that in this case my 'method' was rather poor, and I wasn't trying to bridge gaps/ ensure understanding and foster dialogue. Being more diplomatic would have made a world of difference, and normally I try to do that - I was just in idea mode and frustrated with Ni once again turning into something indescribable, and letting go of the presentation quite a lot. Sorry.

 

[Thisica]

Because it's magical

In what way? It sounds vague.

 

[highlander]

That's interesting. It kind of reminds me of when I forget commonly used words in the middle of a conversation, and end up saying something very confusing instead.

Pure memory work is painful for me. I forget words all the time unless I can work through a logical process that attaches the word to the concept. One word that consistently escapes me is "concurrent". It's mentally blocked from my mind whenever I need to use it.

Thank you so much for helping me to realize that I haven't head early onset dementia since I was a child. I really mean that. I always thought there was something wrong with me.

In what way? It sounds vague.

It's a joke

Imagine a whole bunch of self-help articles that deal with various aspects of the human condition. Now imagine that there is a particular individual to whom I am moved to offer advice. The person might have issues with dating or a gf, and perhaps his Mom is being annoying, and then there's the situation at work. Ni takes all the articles covering these topics even tangentially, then snips out the bits and pieces that apply to this guy right here, and then synthesize it with a particular theme that doesn't come from any article, but from "just me."

For instance, the theme might be "just relax," and I explain how that will help with the gf situation (too uptight to risk anything), the Mom situation (she only cares about you, accept her input without feeling pressured to act on it), and the situation at work (just do one thing at a time, instead of everything at once.).

The result is a custom-tailored answer perfect for the situation at hand. It is problematic in that the answer cannot easily be generalized, because it is very particular to that one case.

That's how Ni works.

This is one of the best descriptions I think I've read. Maybe I should reread some Jung and look more carefully.

 

[ThatGirl]

Ha! One of the things that stood out in Night's video was when he confused the word "temper" (I think not re-watching) for temperature.

I do that sometimes, when I am speaking from a sort of mental muscle memory, and formulating the next idea at the same time.

 

[Nicodemus]

This is one of the best descriptions I think I've read.

And it only took uumlau about 40 attempts to describe Ni to achieve that.

 

[ThatGirl]

So basically Ni is taking all relevant material into consideration before coming to or acting upon a conclusion.

It is personalized to the specific subject because while there may be some universal generalities, there will also be factors which cause the situation to be uniquely independent. There fore, the final conclusion is more fit for the time than the subject?

 

[highlander]

Ha! One of the things that stood out in Night's video was when he confused the word "temper" (I think not re-watching) for temperature.

I do that sometimes, when I am speaking from a sort of mental muscle memory, and formulating the next idea at the same time.

I caught that in the video. I think I might reverse the order of two words in conversations as well sometimes. Or because I can't think of an immediate way to more clearly describe something or I'm too mentally lazy to come up with the right word(s), I say something really vague. When people get to know me, they undertand the shorthand somehow. "Where is that thing" or something like that for example.

 

[ThatGirl]

I caught that in the video. I think I might reverse the order of two words in conversations as well sometimes. Or because I can't think of an immediate way to more clearly describe something or I'm too mentally lazy to come up with the right word(s), I say something really vague. When people get to know me, they undertand the shorthand somehow. "Where is that thing" or something like that for example.

I see interesting. I thought it had more to do with formulating synapses on the spot, and integrating those with familiar associations.

Perhaps Ti.

As far as general wording. Everyone kind of knows I mix two words that do not seem to belong together in an effort to describe one thing I am thinking. That becomes word salad.

 

[highlander]

I

As far as general wording. Everyone kind of knows I mix two words that do not seem to belong together in an effort to describe one thing I am thinking. That becomes word salad.

That does seem like Ni. It's also funny that I understand perfectly well what you mean when you do that. I don't even notice the errors.

I sometimes either invent words or alternatively come up with creative uses for them. I stretch the limits of my understanding on what a word means which usually works out ok I think. I am constantly struggling for the right words in conversations. Sometimes I just pause because that one word just won't come and I feel like I have to have that one word - so I get hung up on it.

 

[skylights]

I think that to some extent, it's difficult to describe ANY introverted function. Ti maybe a bit less difficult, but all three of the others? Yeah, there are elements of them that I believe are often missed and misunderstood.

i am still trying to understand Si.

Jung is often typed as INTP (and I heard/read somewhere that he typed himself as INTP or Ti, but I don't have a source), yet if you read his writing, such as his original text on types, it doesn't read anything like an INTP would write: it's full of Ni-thinking. So, in MBTI terms, he was definitely an "introverted thinker" (INTx), but his writing makes it clear that INTJ (Ni) is far more probable than INTP (Ti). So, if I am right, and the originator of the concept of Ni couldn't see it in himself, what are we to make of Ni?

If Jung was an INTJ, where was the Te though? I see more INTP there.

what if he was INFJ? that's what i thought initially upon reading some of his writings, before also reading somewhere that he typed himself INTP (i do not remember the source at all, but i don't remember it being particularly trustworthy)... anyway, his stuff about an acorn holding the potential of a tree, the whole concept of an archetype, the boiling down of religions, etc... it all seems really Ni. i definitely see Ti over Te, but i'm inclined to see Ni over Ti.

hard to question his own type theory though...

 

[INTPness]

Another Ni question:

It's been mentioned in this thread that Ni will sort through information in order to give "the most appropriate answer" for the situation at hand - or "an answer that is tailored to the individual or group in question".

There are people in this world with whom you know exactly where you stand - because they speak their mind openly. Then there are people with whom you don't really know where you stand - because there is so much going on internally that they don't reveal. I'm probably in that second category and it's been something I've had to work on through my life. I'm nice and easy-going on the outside and then sometimes if I kind of "snap" on someone, they act shocked because they never saw a clue to my frustration or anger. It's just something I have to be more aware of - to put out cues letting them know that I need something to change, therefore, giving them time to make an adjustment.

In "tailoring" an answer that is perfect for the situation, do you Ni users ever find that people get "impression X" of you - only to find out later that you have thoughts that are a bit different (it's just that you "tailored" or "molded" your thoughts to the situation at hand). Not sure if that makes sense or not. I like the abilities of Ni (as described in this thread), but if you tailor an answer and make it fit perfectly, then a week later you tailor a different answer that goes off in a different direction, does it ever confuse people and make them say, "But, last week you sort of indicated something a bit different!"????

And logically speaking, you may not have contradicted yourself in your 2 tailored answers, but it may have given different ideas to the listener, and they may not know where exactly you stand because of that confusion. ???

 

[uumlau]

wait

Is the concept of just trying to tie a few of these questions into some overarching explanation that answers all of them an example how Ni works?

Yes. Your synthesis was quite sound, in my estimation.

ThatGirl carries it a bit further:

So basically Ni is taking all relevant material into consideration before coming to or acting upon a conclusion.

It is personalized to the specific subject because while there may be some universal generalities, there will also be factors which cause the situation to be uniquely independent. There fore, the final conclusion is more fit for the time than the subject?

With all the threads about exploring your type, TG, this reply convinces me that you've got Ni in you.

And the universal generalities are stored/remembered in an "Ni format", not a Ti or Si format.

One analogy that I used a long time ago is a gem with facets, or (easier to analogize) a 20-sided die. What will happen is that I roll the die in my head, and I get a "19" for example, and then I tell the outside world, "19." The whole truth is really "the rolling 20-sided die," not "19," but "19" is the ONLY way to communicate what needs communicating at that time. If I step back and explain to you "how do I know it's 19," then I end up giving a disjointed explanation that starts to explain the whole universe, without ever answering your real question. For that time and that place, "19" is correct.

This is where INTPs and other Si or Ne types can get confused by my words/arguments, because they'll remember that I said "6" in a very similar situation 5 months ago, so I'm asked, "Is the real answer '6' or '19'?" It's neither. The real answer is that rolling d20, but there's no way in hell I can explain that. But in this situation "19" is correct, and in that prior situation "6" was correct, and no, I'm not being inconsistent, dammit. It only seems inconsistent because there is some detail that is obvious to me, but not obvious to others, and I don't know which detail they are missing that would demonstrate consistency. And most of the answers they would deem consistent would seem inconsistent (i.e., untrue) to me!

[To add a bit of weirdness to the rolling d20 analogy, assume that each time I roll it, it comes up "19", until something changes - the situation "makes" it roll 19, it isn't random on the inside, only to those on the outside.]

If Jung was an INTJ, where was the Te though? I see more INTP there.

what if he was INFJ? that's what i thought initially upon reading some of his writings, before also reading somewhere that he typed himself INTP (i do not remember the source at all, but i don't remember it being particularly trustworthy)... anyway, his stuff about an acorn holding the potential of a tree, the whole concept of an archetype, the boiling down of religions, etc... it all seems really Ni. i definitely see Ti over Te, but i'm inclined to see Ni over Ti.

hard to question his own type theory though...

INFJ is a definite possibility. It's also possible he was an INTJ fascinated about how people tic: the topic matter can make an INTJ sound FJ-ish. Either way, he's definitely Ni.

 

[Fidelia]

Wow, this is an interesting discussion because I see myself in so much of what you are describing. I always just assumed it was weird personal quirks. It's nice to know there's a name for it!

I need to go and reread the whole thread now, but I found it interesting that someone said Ni tends to remember the ideas, but not attach sources to them. Rather it snips out anything that is relevent to save for later and bring together to then tailor to the situation. This really, really sounds familiar to me.

 

[Craft]

INFJ is a definite possibility. It's also possible he was an INTJ fascinated about how people tic: the topic matter can make an INTJ sound FJ-ish. Either way, he's definitely Ni.

"Type Orientation"(Cognitive Functions) is a theoretical creation. It is a plausible yet unprovable perspective: an answer to patterns. It is Ni'ish. It is also Ti'ish in the sense that it is not achieved via empirical agreement.

it snips out anything that is relevent to save for later and bring together to then tailor to the situation.

Strikes me as Introverted Perception in general. An internal image application.

 

[Fidelia]

Okay, done! I also really liked umlauu's thoughts on Ni looking at the underlying function of something, rather than just the idea or object itself.

For a long time I've wondered what element it is that allows some people to see things that seem to be very straightforward and obvious cause-and-effect cases, but which don't seem to be to other people. They need you to show them the blood on the knife before they are going to believe that there's anything wrong with what is currently happening. If that is not possible, they need to wait until events play out to show the aforementioned outcome will really happen. I'm not saying that I have any special powers or that I'm 100% accurate, but every now and then I run across someone else who seems to look at the world the way I do in that regard and I wanted to know what component that was. I think now that it is Ni. It almost seems sometimes like it would be insulting to explain it step by step because it is not immediately apparent that certain types of things are not obvious to others. It's kind of like those 3D pictures where you can see a different picture inside if you look at it right. I just used to assume that everyone could see what I was seeing.