User Tag List

First 789101119 Last

Results 81 to 90 of 400

Thread: Signs of Ni

  1. #81
    Analytical Dreamer Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    17,518

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    Believe it or not, INTJs tend to have plenty of doubt about things.

    We just work to eliminate that doubt as much as we possibly can.

    In this line of work, that tends to be through extensive research.

    And, believe it or not, Ni is good at juggling multiple possibilities.

    In fact, I'd say it's far more adept at doing so than is Ne.

    It just does so with an aim of narrowing it down to the right one.

    Or, when that's not possible, by figuring out the probability weightings for the various possible scenarios.
    The narrowing down tendency goes along with the overall goal-orientation of J/TJ. We have some end in sight that motivates us to evaluate and manage the various possibilities in a way that brings us closer to that end. It often seems that for the NTP, the process itself is the goal; it need not produce any (specific) result, it need only function with internal consistency. Hence the ability to entertain a broad spectrum of possibilities, black swans included, without any compulsion to evaluate or down-select.
    I've been called a criminal, a terrorist, and a threat to the known universe. But everything you were told is a lie. The truth is, they've taken our freedom, our home, and our future. The time has come for all humanity to take a stand...

  2. #82
    royal member Rasofy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    5,933

    Default

    Sounds like it is easy for INTJs to contemplate multiple scenarios before they make their mind , but once they get their egos invested on the idea (which, ime, isn't so hard), they can easily get in trouble.
    Ironically, the degree of confidence you both place on your functions made me more confident of my points.
    That's all.
    -----------------

    A man builds. A parasite asks 'Where is my share?'
    A man creates. A parasite says, 'What will the neighbors think?'
    A man invents. A parasite says, 'Watch out, or you might tread on the toes of God... '


    -----------------

  3. #83
    Happy Dancer uumlau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    953 sp/so
    Posts
    5,708

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rasofy View Post
    Sounds like it is easy for INTJs to contemplate multiple scenarios before they make their mind , but once they get their egos invested on the idea (which, ime, isn't so hard), they can easily get in trouble.
    Ironically, the degree of confidence you both place on your functions made me more confident of my points.
    That's all.
    The ego-investment that INTPs see in INTJs appears (to me) to be reading Te as if it were Fe.

    INTJs think of ideas in terms of how useful they are, and don't think in terms of strict technical truth. For example, consider the list of theories of gravity I made earlier in the thread: treat any of them as absolute truth, and they're all wrong; treat them as having varying levels of utility, and they're all correct, even though they cannot all be "true". INTPs will tend to argue in terms of truth, while INTJs will "stubbornly" hang onto their "wrong ideas" because it's the utility/functionality, not the "truth" that matters.

    INTPs tend to interpret their lack of success in such arguments with INTJs to the INTJs' ego-investment in the idea. Because, obviously, the INTP is correct and the INTJ is obviously wrong, and the only reason the INTJ could possibly disagree is such ego-investment, because that's the only reason INTPs perceive in themselves that one would be so stubbornly wrong.

    I'm not saying INTJs are never ego-invested in their ideas, but INTPs' arguments are often at cross-purposes with what INTJs are actually saying, more often than not.
    An argument is two people sharing their ignorance.

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

  4. #84
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    STP
    Posts
    10,499

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    The ego-investment that INTPs see in INTJs appears (to me) to be reading Te as if it were Fe.

    INTJs think of ideas in terms of how useful they are, and don't think in terms of strict technical truth. For example, consider the list of theories of gravity I made earlier in the thread: treat any of them as absolute truth, and they're all wrong; treat them as having varying levels of utility, and they're all correct, even though they cannot all be "true". INTPs will tend to argue in terms of truth, while INTJs will "stubbornly" hang onto their "wrong ideas" because it's the utility/functionality, not the "truth" that matters.

    INTPs tend to interpret their lack of success in such arguments with INTJs to the INTJs' ego-investment in the idea. Because, obviously, the INTP is correct and the INTJ is obviously wrong, and the only reason the INTJ could possibly disagree is such ego-investment, because that's the only reason INTPs perceive in themselves that one would be so stubbornly wrong.

    I'm not saying INTJs are never ego-invested in their ideas, but INTPs' arguments are often at cross-purposes with what INTJs are actually saying, more often than not.
    With Si its all about the detail, with Ni its about the concept which means the detail is fuzzy so it can be applied...I know personally I am aware of the "fuzzy" that seperates utility vs truth. Focusing on the details of the truth can overwhelm..not because my Ni is not right, but because its like nitpicking where half the time there is no reason to nitpick...because I am aware that its fuzzy and not concretely true.
    Im out, its been fun

  5. #85
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    The ego-investment that INTPs see in INTJs appears (to me) to be reading Te as if it were Fe.
    Could you expand on this?

    I've never thought of it this way...

    I've always thought it was more like reading Te as Fi...

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    INTJs think of ideas in terms of how useful they are, and don't think in terms of strict technical truth. For example, consider the list of theories of gravity I made earlier in the thread: treat any of them as absolute truth, and they're all wrong; treat them as having varying levels of utility, and they're all correct, even though they cannot all be "true". INTPs will tend to argue in terms of truth, while INTJs will "stubbornly" hang onto their "wrong ideas" because it's the utility/functionality, not the "truth" that matters.
    So, in other words, INTPs are annoying nitpickers?

    Yeah, sounds about right.

  6. #86
    Happy Dancer uumlau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    953 sp/so
    Posts
    5,708

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    Could you expand on this?

    I've never thought of it this way...

    I've always thought it was more like reading Te as Fi...
    If it were reading Fi, then it wouldn't be so much ego invested in the idea so much as a commitment to an abstract value. INTJs tend to have particular hot-button issues on which they're clearly irrational. They will often admit to being irrational, because it's a matter of right versus wrong, not truth. It's conviction, not irrationality.

    In the typical INTP perspective, Ti exhibits the same "conviction" with respect to ideas that Fi does with respect to values. That's why mature INTPs will talk in conditional, tentative terms: because to assert one's internal factual truth as "the truth" is evidence of hubris (in Fe terms). Dom/aux Fi is similarly tentative when sharing values.

    The Fe/Ti dynamic is to chide Ti to behave correctly even though such behavior isn't strictly logical. When INTPs see INTJs expounding facts in a Te manner, it reeks of that hubris, of self-centered logical rightness, and must be called out in an Fe way to invoke a sense of shame (which doesn't work very well on INTJs, and works all too well on INTPs).

    The Te/Fi dynamic is that Fi has its deeply-held convictions, but there is a (Te) recognition that not all of these convictions can be materialized in the real world. Fi holds Te to internalized idealistic values, while Te tempers Fi values to conform (to a degree!) to practical reality. An INTJ expounding an idea isn't intentionally imposing his own intellectual concepts onto reality, but rather there is an ongoing "negotiation" with reality that INTPs don't see, because their inner Ti logic is as shielded from reality as our Fi values.

    So an INTJ reacting to another INTJs "incorrect" statement will offer counter-evidence (your statement A cannot be true because X and Y are demonstrably true instead, and offer a much better explanation of events), while an INTP will instead assume the INTJ has leaped to a conclusion and attempt first to offer gentle "nitpicks" (as you aptly put it) to help nudge the INTJ out of his misconception, and eventually resort to outright attempts to shame based on supposed hubris on the part of the INTJ.

    These are just communication styles, though, not actual incorrect reasoning on the part of either party.
    An argument is two people sharing their ignorance.

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

  7. #87
    Happy Dancer uumlau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    953 sp/so
    Posts
    5,708

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by _Poki_ View Post
    With Si its all about the detail, with Ni its about the concept which means the detail is fuzzy so it can be applied...I know personally I am aware of the "fuzzy" that seperates utility vs truth. Focusing on the details of the truth can overwhelm..not because my Ni is not right, but because its like nitpicking where half the time there is no reason to nitpick...because I am aware that its fuzzy and not concretely true.
    If you haven't read Godel, Escher, Bach, you might find it interesting in this regard. It's a detailed study of how precise logical statements only map to reality in an imperfect way. In particular, he focuses on self-referential logic, invoking parallels between Escher's self-referential drawings, Bach's self-referential music (playing music in counterpoint with itself, among other things), and Godel's classic incompleteness theorem.
    An argument is two people sharing their ignorance.

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

  8. #88
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    The Fe/Ti dynamic is to chide Ti to behave correctly even though such behavior isn't strictly logical. When INTPs see INTJs expounding facts in a Te manner, it reeks of that hubris, of self-centered logical rightness, and must be called out in an Fe way to invoke a sense of shame (which doesn't work very well on INTJs, and works all too well on INTPs).
    Interesting...

    Not to nitpick, but this would be more judging Te via Fe, though, right?

    As opposed to seeing Te as if it's Fe?

    I can definitely get on board with them judging our Te via their Fe...

    I think it's kinda why I said seeing Te as Fi...

    I think that when we make statements about what is objectively true, they think we're just projecting subjective Fi judgments onto reality, which, in some cases we may be, but plenty of times we're not. There is such a thing as external reality, and there are such things as statements that correspond with it, and ones that don't. Obviously, it's not simply a binary thing, there are degrees to which statements correspond, and, as you've pointed out above, there are ways in which statements correspond in certain regards, but not necessarily in others. Regardless, though, not all Te is simply Fi. That's the bullshit conviction that I think a lot of TPs and FJs engage in.

    I think this basically makes our interpretations the same, no?

    Language just clarified.

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    The Te/Fi dynamic is that Fi has its deeply-held convictions, but there is a (Te) recognition that not all of these convictions can be materialized in the real world. Fi holds Te to internalized idealistic values, while Te tempers Fi values to conform (to a degree!) to practical reality. An INTJ expounding an idea isn't intentionally imposing his own intellectual concepts onto reality, but rather there is an ongoing "negotiation" with reality that INTPs don't see, because their inner Ti logic is as shielded from reality as our Fi values.
    With regards to this last part, I do have to say I always find that part interesting, cuz, while I agree with it in one regard, I do always have to go back and say that Ti, as a T function, is dealing with the world in a different way than Fi (truth vs values), and, as such, is, by that one dimension, closer to reality than is Fi. This all draws back to what I've called the tripartite meaning of objectivity/subjectivity in typology (LINK), which, now that I think of it, you are partially responsible for (as is Eric B).

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    So an INTJ reacting to another INTJs "incorrect" statement will offer counter-evidence (your statement A cannot be true because X and Y are demonstrably true instead, and offer a much better explanation of events), while an INTP will instead assume the INTJ has leaped to a conclusion and attempt first to offer gentle "nitpicks" (as you aptly put it) to help nudge the INTJ out of his misconception, and eventually resort to outright attempts to shame based on supposed hubris on the part of the INTJ.
    Yes, this is pretty much spot on.

    Although I think "misconception" would be more accurate in quotes.



    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    These are just communication styles, though, not actual incorrect reasoning on the part of either party.
    I dunno...

    I'd say it's pretty dumb on the part of INTPs.

    By your construction (which I agree with), I think the implication is:

    If we correct them, it's in the form of: hey, that thought doesn't correspond with reality. Objective critique.

    If they correct us, it's in the form of: hey, you're not supposed to behave that way. Bullshit, subjective ethical critique.

    I've wanted to have this particular discussion for a while now -- glad it's finally come up... and in an Ni thread, of all places...

  9. #89
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    @uumlau

    I'd also be interested in hearing how you think the Ti/Fe dynamic changes when you're talking about FJs instead of TPs...

    I've spent a lot of time thinking about this, but more with regards to TJs and FPs...

    Would like to see how your thoughts compare to mine...

  10. #90
    royal member Rasofy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    5,933

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    If they correct us, it's in the form of: hey, you're not supposed to behave that way. Bullshit, subjective ethical critique.
    Not really. We can also nitpick the crap out of every argument.
    To be fair with you, you did far more research than me, so I'm not really able to discuss your points in an utilitarian Te approach. I could tear down a lot of cause/consequence connections that I consider arbitrary (and you'd call it ''nitpicking''), but I'd probably be doing what @uumlau predicted earlier, and I hate acting predictable. I mean, it's not my style.
    Btw you both brought some very good points.
    -----------------

    A man builds. A parasite asks 'Where is my share?'
    A man creates. A parasite says, 'What will the neighbors think?'
    A man invents. A parasite says, 'Watch out, or you might tread on the toes of God... '


    -----------------

Similar Threads

  1. Is anger a sign of righteousness?
    By coberst in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 03-25-2010, 08:34 AM
  2. Literary Examples of Ni
    By Domino in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: 12-29-2009, 11:21 AM
  3. [Ni] The pain of Ni in a male INFJ
    By nzAShadow in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 63
    Last Post: 11-10-2009, 07:10 PM
  4. Tell-Tale Signs of the Types
    By RansomedbyFire in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 125
    Last Post: 09-11-2008, 11:30 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