• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

I know what Ni is now!

Werebudgie

I want my account deleted
Joined
Jan 20, 2014
Messages
398
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
6w5
Ni-dom has an interconnected web of patterns collected from the external world...The pattern (or a given part of it) may be superposed on the framework of an outstanding issue to find a matching pattern from the database...Based on the matching pattern, the missing parts of the external outstanding issue may be "guessed"...So it's kind of an extrapolation process...And Ni in Ni-dom is a reservoir of observed patterns (which form a landscape, web, etc...in Ni-dom's mind...The landscape is a sub-conscious one, is that what you meant with it being outside of you [MENTION=20789]Werebudgie[/MENTION]?...Ni-dom doesn't have conscious control on how the landscape is formed...He/she cannot manipulate/modify the landscape but operate in it more consciously, perhaps after certain functions get stronger...)

No, that isn't what it means or is for me. It really is a landscape outside of me, not in my subconscious any more than the planet on which I live is in my subconscious. The landscape would exist without me in it, it would be there if I never existed, just as the planet would exist without me. I can move within the landscape and impact it in small ways just as I can move within my physical environment and impact it in small ways. Yes, it is possible to operate in it more or less consciously and to gain competence in acting (in specific ways limited to my function and location) within it.

But there's a HUGE difference between being the creator of a landscape, and being a small entity moving and acting within it. I will never ever be the creator of this landscape any more than I will be the creator of the planet on which I live.

As a sidenote regarding Ne Ni discussions:

Ne-dom reminds me of "brute force" style hacking where the hacker tries all kinds of combinations in quick succession whereas Ni feels like whatever style that is related with trying to find the correct passcode itself based on the patterns observed in the environment...

That's interesting! Much of my Ne experience is with a Ne-aux, but even there it fits. Will check with my Ne-dom friend on this, if I get a chance. Really interesting description.
 

Werebudgie

I want my account deleted
Joined
Jan 20, 2014
Messages
398
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
6w5
That's better than me...I keep reading it as "Wedgie" (Ne...the skip-over function!)

Nobody knows what Ni is except Ni-doms.

Apparently I should have chosen Wereparakeet over Werebudgie. But the word budgie is cuter than the word parakeet, thus in my mind making a stronger contrast between "were" (usually a scary predator eg werewolf) and the type of animal shifted into.

Ah, the best laid plans of mice and Ni-doms....
 

Alea_iacta_est

New member
Joined
Dec 3, 2013
Messages
1,834
Thanks for clarifying! And I didn't realize you were looking at Ti in a Ti-dom specifically, in context with Ne-aux or Se-aux. That makes sense

First, to be clear: Not emotional, not if you're referring to Fe-aux. F as a judging function is not oriented to emotion, but rather to values. Easy to mistake the two given the usual meaning of the word "feeling" outside of the MBTI/Jungian framework.

Otherwise, what an interesting description! Ni extends beyond that, for me - meaning, it doesn't just function with Fe-aux and so is not solely about values or even emotional info. For example in me, partial Ni-Se integration yields information about the environment around me as a major other realm. But the description of taking specific experiences (my addition) and happenings, tearing them open and finding the meaning behind - I would say underneath - that has a lot of clarity to it. It shows how a perceiving sense could look like it's doing logical work. And it does also apply to how I experience Se information run through Ni. It's Ni perceiving meaning underneath the Se sensory data. That explains a lot.

IMO the crucial thing is understanding that it is perception .... not created ideas, narratives, or analyses.

In any case - thank you, that description is great in its clarity.

That's why its hard to explain Ni, because the way it works looks exactly like thinking through something inductively, but it isn't thinking. It's just prematurely knowing what's behind the curtain before its lifted.
 

Werebudgie

I want my account deleted
Joined
Jan 20, 2014
Messages
398
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
6w5
That's why its hard to explain Ni, because the way it works looks exactly like thinking through something inductively, but it isn't thinking. It's just prematurely knowing what's behind the curtain before its lifted.

*nods* This makes lots and lots of sense to me. Because Ni can simply perceive what's behind the curtain just by looking at it. It's as simple as that, just looking at something.

The difficulty with Fe-aux (in my case at least) is that it orients me to legitimize external values/perspectives over my own, by default. In real world terms, this translates to: I'm standing there seeing what's behind the curtain from my specific vantage point. Those around me don't see that layer at all, and are acting like it's not there. If I speak what I see, the most typical response from others is to question my perception and tell me I'm making stuff up or otherwise wrong. Because for them, it just isn't there and it's like, where the hell am I getting this? But for me it's as basic as saying "there's a table right there" in the visible world. Now, eventually, what's behind the curtain will make itself visible in other ways - that's been my experience at least. But in the meantime, it can get very frustrating.

eta:
And we can't even get a damn common consensus.

But we're getting closer, it seems to me.
 

Redbone

Orisha
Joined
Apr 27, 2010
Messages
2,882
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
9w8
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
*nods* This makes lots and lots of sense to me. Because Ni can simply perceive what's behind the curtain just by looking at it. It's as simple as that, just looking at something.

The difficulty with Fe-aux (in my case at least) is that it orients me to legitimize external values/perspectives over my own, by default. In real world terms, this translates to: I'm standing there seeing what's behind the curtain from my specific vantage point. Those around me don't see that layer at all, and are acting like it's not there. If I speak what I see, the most typical response from others is to question my perception and tell me I'm making stuff up or otherwise wrong. Because for them, it just isn't there and it's like, where the hell am I getting this? But for me it's as basic as saying "there's a table right there" in the visible world. Now, eventually, what's behind the curtain will make itself visible in other ways - that's been my experience at least. But in the meantime, it can get very frustrating.

eta:

But we're getting closer, it seems to me.

Knows what's already behind the curtain, eh? :dry: You got proof that you know what you know? j/k

I've read through this thread and I still don't know what Ni is...:cry: Come on you guys!

Actually, I have a vague idea but it's hard to picture "in motion".
 

Werebudgie

I want my account deleted
Joined
Jan 20, 2014
Messages
398
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
6w5
I've read through this thread and I still don't know what Ni is...:cry: Come on you guys!

Actually, I have a vague idea but it's hard to picture "in motion".

Maybe that's the best that's possible.
 

valaki

New member
Joined
Jan 1, 2014
Messages
940
MBTI Type
SeNi
Enneagram
8+7
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Bad reply. You cant give any real life scenario that differentiates between Ti and Te, since the functions are mental processes and all sorts of different mental processes can manifest similarly in a real life scenario. There is a reason why i chose to use a real life scenario instead of explaining the theory or neurology behind the functions.

OK, but it would have been a better example if contrasting Ti and Te on the same subject material.


A few different angles on the same basic theme that I hope can help clarify this (as I understand it at least):

OK, thanks, that made sense.


I suspect that this points to one possible difference between a function in the inferior position, and a function in the dominant position. If I tried to describe or understand what Se is, on its own, from my perspective as someone with Se-inf, I wonder if there wouldn't be a similar problem of my version being "flat" and thus sort of unrecognizable in some way by a Se-dom. The only way Se makes any organic sense to me is in clear service to Ni, so I really don't think I could begin to comprehend what it is for a Se-dom as a lead function.

Well try to describe Se, I'm curious. ;)

I'm not sure btw if I have inf Ni because I could see how two-dimensional the OP was... but I can't claim I have this landscape like you do, either. :/ It would be interesting to see Ni descriptions from ENxJ's and from ISxP's as well. :)


Ni perception feels like home to me. That's beyond nice for me. It's ... mmmm, home. Time as a coordinate is just part of how it works (and may partially explain why people think Ni sees into the future - in my case, it doesn't, it's just that time isn't linear in that landscape as I perceive it, and so the future isn't completely inaccessible the way linear time frameworks say it should be).

The future certainly isn't inaccessible in the sense that you can speculate about it. It's just that often we can't know all factors that go into it. Sometimes it's possible though, at least with a high likelihood.


No. Not me at least (I'm Ni-dom). I perceive a landscape that is not culturally accepted as real the way that 5-accepted-sense perception is accepted. It's not "ideas." It's just not culturally accepted as real the way that the S perception is. When people think N is about ideas because it creates serious distortions in understanding, in reference to my own Ni perception.

I think intuition is most likely a real human sense, just like S senses are. IMO, the problem comes in a cultural distortion that splits out the 5 "real" senses from other modes of human sense perception that are just as real. With this split, N perceptual reality can (semi-plausibly) look like "ideas." It's a distortion, but one that seems relatively widespread.

That's an interesting way to see it. I don't think however that this is just culture, I mean, even though the sense perception isn't perfect, it's still more reliable than the N perception. Also it is more direct.

Do you disagree with that and if so why?


Otherwise, what an interesting description! Ni extends beyond that, for me - meaning, it doesn't just function with Fe-aux and so is not solely about values or even emotional info. For example in me, partial Ni-Se integration yields information about the environment around me as a major other realm. But the description of taking specific experiences (my addition) and happenings, tearing them open and finding the meaning behind - I would say underneath - that has a lot of clarity to it. It shows how a perceiving sense could look like it's doing logical work. And it does also apply to how I experience Se information run through Ni. It's Ni perceiving meaning underneath the Se sensory data. That explains a lot.

What does this Ni-Se integration look like for you?


*nods* This makes lots and lots of sense to me. Because Ni can simply perceive what's behind the curtain just by looking at it. It's as simple as that, just looking at something.

I would like to correct that, Ni can make a guess based on whatever data, doesn't truly see through the curtain. Unless you say it's got a magical quality, which I don't believe it has.


The difficulty with Fe-aux (in my case at least) is that it orients me to legitimize external values/perspectives over my own, by default. In real world terms, this translates to: I'm standing there seeing what's behind the curtain from my specific vantage point. Those around me don't see that layer at all, and are acting like it's not there. If I speak what I see, the most typical response from others is to question my perception and tell me I'm making stuff up or otherwise wrong. Because for them, it just isn't there and it's like, where the hell am I getting this? But for me it's as basic as saying "there's a table right there" in the visible world. Now, eventually, what's behind the curtain will make itself visible in other ways - that's been my experience at least. But in the meantime, it can get very frustrating.

You need to support your Ni perception with evidence. Or, at the minimum, provide the data that the conclusion eventually comes from. I know for me that's the only way to accept a Ni conclusion.


But if what you're saying is correct, I don't see any correlation between Ni-use and long-term planning the xNTJ's are renowned for; in fact, that seems Ti to me. Maybe it's easy to confuse Ni and Ti. And maybe I equate things that aren't comparable.

I noticed that myself, the confusion between Ti and Ni. Hell, even the MBTI official website isn't very clear about them.

It says:

Introverted Intuition: Looks at consistency of ideas and thoughts with an internal framework. Trusts flashes from the unconscious, which may be hard for others to understand.

Introverted Thinking: Seeks internal consistency and logic of ideas. Trusts his or her internal framework, which may be difficult to explain to others.

The only real difference here is that the unconscious is mentioned for Ni.


Here's how you tell the difference:

Ti: Deductive logic. General -> Specific "All men are mortal. Socrates is a man. Therefore, Socrates is a mortal."

or "24 is an even number. All even numbers are divisible by 2. Therefore, 24 is divisible by 2."

Ni: Pseudo-Inductive logic. Specific -> General "It has rained everyday on January 1st in Hawaii for the past several years. Therefore, it will rain next year on that day as well." (Can't be proven but it is an apt prediction considering past events)

or "Given the sequence 1,1,2,3,5,8,13,21,X, We can infer from the pattern that X = 34"

Hmmm I'm very inductive. I can do deductive thinking but it always feels kind of foreign to me. Though maybe it only feels foreign when actually breaking up the logic into concrete steps? Because otherwise the logic itself is just fine e.g. in your examples. I can intuitively calculate all these things. Note I said intuitively :/ Do you think that Ti always does conscious step by step logical reasoning? I'm saying all this because maybe I don't even have that much Ti and just confusing Ni for Ti in some cases but I don't know.


Hence me saying "Pseudo-inductive", as Ni is indeed a perceiving function. Ti is deductive because it is given general data from extroverted intuition or extroverted sensing and it hones in on specifics. Ti is precision based going from General -> Specific, making it deductive (and not pseudo-deductive because it is actual thinking).

Hmm again I don't relate. When I analyse data it's either done by looking at the specifics and inferring logical patterns/logical structure from that, that is, I'm being inductive, and I feel this is Ti for me; or it's done by eureka moments, which I don't really call Ti, sure.

I can use already fleshed out logical structures to make up or do something though, e.g. apply the logic in practice, I suppose that maybe is deductive.

Also Werebudgie is saying you were talking about Ti-doms only, really?

I just don't know where you're getting all these ideas about Ti being deductive. Where is this from? Is this your own theory on MBTI?


And we can't even get a damn common consensus.

Because maybe the concepts are wrong? People are trying to associate so many different things with Ti and Ni etc. Where's the guarantee that all those things are all truly related?
 

Alea_iacta_est

New member
Joined
Dec 3, 2013
Messages
1,834
[MENTION=20622]valaki[/MENTION]

Just because you can use inductive logic does not mean you use Ni. Introverted intuition is a perception function, meaning it is not actually logic, it just sort of works like it unconsciously. When you don't use Ni, you have to consciously think about the specifics and build a general conclusion. When you do use Ni, you immediately see the big picture from specific information without even thinking or calculating. It's perceiving information at its most basic element and reading past specifics instantaneously to gain a general idea, which isn't inductive logic (because logic is conscious) but works sort of like it.

And holy shit, for the last time, Ti is, by its very definition, deductive logic; it applies general logical principles to situations in order to understand specific occurrences, it is always refining general information into specific parts.
 

valaki

New member
Joined
Jan 1, 2014
Messages
940
MBTI Type
SeNi
Enneagram
8+7
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
[MENTION=20622]valaki[/MENTION]

Just because you can use inductive logic does not mean you use Ni. Introverted intuition is a perception function, meaning it is not actually logic, it just sort of works like it unconsciously. When you don't use Ni, you have to consciously think about the specifics and build a general conclusion. When you do use Ni, you immediately see the big picture from specific information without even thinking or calculating. It's perceiving information at its most basic element and reading past specifics instantaneously to gain a general idea, which isn't inductive logic (because logic is conscious) but works sort of like it.

I didn't say inductive logic was Ni. I suggest you re-read my post ;)

But actually, I'll save you the trouble and will quote you the relevant parts:

"Do you think that Ti always does conscious step by step logical reasoning?"

"When I analyse data it's either done by looking at the specifics and inferring logical patterns/logical structure from that, that is, I'm being inductive, and I feel this is Ti for me"

So, what do you think?


And holy shit, for the last time, Ti is, by its very definition, deductive logic; it applies general logical principles to situations in order to understand specific occurrences, it is always refining general information into specific parts.

Will you show me where that Ti definition is coming from? What is the source of this definition?
 

Alea_iacta_est

New member
Joined
Dec 3, 2013
Messages
1,834
I didn't say inductive logic was Ni. I suggest you re-read my post ;)

But actually, I'll save you the trouble and will quote you the relevant parts:

"Do you think that Ti always does conscious step by step logical reasoning?"

"When I analyse data it's either done by looking at the specifics and inferring logical patterns/logical structure from that, that is, I'm being inductive, and I feel this is Ti for me"

So, what do you think?




Will you show me where that Ti definition is coming from? What is the source of this definition?

"Ti seeks precision, such as the exact word to express an idea. It notices the minute distinctions that define the essence of things, then analyzes and classifies them. Ti examines all sides of an issue, looking to solve problems while minimizing effort and risk."
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/INTP

"Unlike Extraverted Thinking, which is conceptual and generalized, Introverted Thinking motivates strategic action in a specific situation. When ENTPs use it, they don't start with abstract rules and apply them, step by step, to bring about a goal. They recognize themselves as part of an ongoing process, and they keep adjusting their behaviors in terms of the whole picture. [the adjustments are the specific in the deductive general -> specific]"
- http://personalitycafe.com/cognitive-functions/38170-introverted-thinking.html

Here's a Jung description that is way too long for me to read, but I know that somewhere in that description will be deductive logic. http://personalitycafe.com/istp-articles/95596-jungs-description-introverted-thinking-type-ti-dominant.html

If you need more, I'll provide them. I have an entire arsenal.

As for your question, that inductive logic could easily be Ti, it's just that Ti's natural preferred way to deal with situations is deductive logic (as it is more accurate and has less chance for error than inductive logic). Anyone can do inductive logic. Remember that Ni isn't actually inductive, it simply works like it.

And no, step-by-step is closer to Te organization. Ti refines information and could care less how you refine it, so long as it gets refined.
 

valaki

New member
Joined
Jan 1, 2014
Messages
940
MBTI Type
SeNi
Enneagram
8+7
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/INTP

- http://personalitycafe.com/cognitive-functions/38170-introverted-thinking.html

Here's a Jung description that is way too long for me to read, but I know that somewhere in that description will be deductive logic. http://personalitycafe.com/istp-articles/95596-jungs-description-introverted-thinking-type-ti-dominant.html

If you need more, I'll provide them. I have an entire arsenal.

Now there's a big problem with that approach in my view. One of these sources is Lenore Thomson, another source is just a generic wikipedia article and another source is Jung himself. Where do you see these as being the same theories? They are not. Lenore had her own theory and it was clearly *not* consistent with Jung's theory.

Skipping past that issue, none of these sources states that Ti is deductive in the fashion you did. It's really too bad you didn't have the time or the attention span to read the Jung one, it says nothing about deductive logic at all. Lenore also doesn't really do that.

I'm going to quote:

Lenore: "p. 210: "Unlike Extraverted Thinking, which is conceptual and generalized, Introverted Thinking motivates strategic action in a specific situation. When ENTPs use it, they don't start with abstract rules and apply them, step by step, to bring about a goal. They recognize themselves as part of an ongoing process, and they keep adjusting their behaviors in terms of the whole picture."

How is this deductive logic?

I could quote a lot more from that article but you'd better just read through the whole thing...

Jung: "For this kind of thinking facts are of secondary importance; what, apparently, is of absolutely paramount importance is the development and presentation of the subjective idea, that primordial symbolical image standing more or less darkly before the inner vision. Its aim, therefore, is never concerned with an intellectual reconstruction of concrete actuality, but with the shaping of that dim image into a resplendent idea. Its desire is to reach reality; its goal is to see how external facts fit into, and fulfil, the framework of the idea; its actual creative power is proved by the fact that this thinking can also create that idea which, though not present in the external facts, is yet the most suitable, abstract expression of them. Its task is accomplished when the idea it has fashioned seems to emerge so inevitably from the external facts that they actually prove its validity."

Again, how is this deductive logic?

The wikipedia article also doesn't say anything about it.

So I'm still asking where you got the idea. Is this association of Ti with deductive logic your own conclusion after reading some stuff or are there any sources explicitly stating it in the way you stated it?


As for your question, that inductive logic could easily be Ti, it's just that Ti's natural preferred way to deal with situations is deductive logic (as it is more accurate and has less chance for error than inductive logic). Anyone can do inductive logic. Remember that Ni isn't actually inductive, it simply works like it.

Anyone can do deductive logic, too.

My preferred way to deal with situations really isn't deductive logic. It's a lot closer to what Lenore describes.


And no, step-by-step is closer to Te organization. Ti refines information and could care less how you refine it, so long as it gets refined.

Yes, could care less. So why did you associate it so strongly with deductive logic?
 

Alea_iacta_est

New member
Joined
Dec 3, 2013
Messages
1,834
Now there's a big problem with that approach in my view. One of these sources is Lenore Thomson, another source is just a generic wikipedia article and another source is Jung himself. Where do you see these as being the same theories? They are not. Lenore had her own theory and it was clearly *not* consistent with Jung's theory.

Skipping past that issue, none of these sources states that Ti is deductive in the fashion you did. It's really too bad you didn't have the time or the attention span to read the Jung one, it says nothing about deductive logic at all. Lenore also doesn't really do that.

I'm going to quote:

Lenore: "p. 210: "Unlike Extraverted Thinking, which is conceptual and generalized, Introverted Thinking motivates strategic action in a specific situation. When ENTPs use it, they don't start with abstract rules and apply them, step by step, to bring about a goal. They recognize themselves as part of an ongoing process, and they keep adjusting their behaviors in terms of the whole picture."

How is this deductive logic?

I could quote a lot more from that article but you'd better just read through the whole thing...

Jung: "For this kind of thinking facts are of secondary importance; what, apparently, is of absolutely paramount importance is the development and presentation of the subjective idea, that primordial symbolical image standing more or less darkly before the inner vision. Its aim, therefore, is never concerned with an intellectual reconstruction of concrete actuality, but with the shaping of that dim image into a resplendent idea. Its desire is to reach reality; its goal is to see how external facts fit into, and fulfil, the framework of the idea; its actual creative power is proved by the fact that this thinking can also create that idea which, though not present in the external facts, is yet the most suitable, abstract expression of them. Its task is accomplished when the idea it has fashioned seems to emerge so inevitably from the external facts that they actually prove its validity."

Again, how is this deductive logic?

The wikipedia article also doesn't say anything about it.

So I'm still asking where you got the idea. Is this association of Ti with deductive logic your own conclusion after reading some stuff or are there any sources explicitly stating it in the way you stated it?




Anyone can do deductive logic, too.

My preferred way to deal with situations really isn't deductive logic. It's a lot closer to what Lenore describes.




Yes, could care less. So why did you associate it so strongly with deductive logic?

(Apologies for the antagonistic stance right now, but I'm pissed off by something outside of this)

What do you actually think Ti is?
 

badger055

Permabanned
Joined
Aug 29, 2012
Messages
570
It would be interesting to see Ni descriptions from ENxJ's and from ISxP's as well. :)

My Ni works like an assistant. Like here are some insights related to what's happening right now. It references a lot of things that are happening to my Ti database and makes spider web connections. I can be talking to someone and my Ni picks up all these indicators of a personality type from how they are acting or how another person of this type acted in the same way. It also does a lot of predicting but not very far into the future just what is happening in that moment. I'm also good at reading if someone is lying. So yea basically I can read peoples minds and do a lot of sherlock holmes stuff. I can know someone better than they know themselves.

On the down side to think about stuff in the future takes me a really long time sometimes. I have to keep coming back to it. I rely heavily on using Ti systems and experience to project far into the future. My Ni can also be super paranoid. It will give me flashes a couple seconds into the future of something going horribly wrong or all the possibilities of stuff that can go wrong in this situation. Sometimes shows me too many possibilities when it wasn't really needed over complicating things. I find it best to actively ignore it sometimes as I find it's a type of fear. It works best when stuff is in motion or I'm attacking a problem.
 

Werebudgie

I want my account deleted
Joined
Jan 20, 2014
Messages
398
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
6w5
That's an interesting way to see it. I don't think however that this is just culture, I mean, even though the sense perception isn't perfect, it's still more reliable than the N perception. Also it is more direct.

Do you disagree with that and if so why?

I'm finding myself deeply bored with this topic ^ ^ as you want to discuss it.

What does this Ni-Se integration look like for you?

I would like to correct that, Ni can make a guess based on whatever data, doesn't truly see through the curtain. Unless you say it's got a magical quality, which I don't believe it has.

I always appreciate it when someone who isn't a Ni-dom "corrects" me on what my dominant function operates for me. But sarcasm aside: It may seem magical to you, but that's a matter of a flaw in your perception or understanding. Not my problem.

And I'd try to share more about what Ni-Se perception is for me as a Ni-dom/Se-inf, but really don't feel like being corrected again by someone who doesn't share this configuration and the experience, but feels they know it better than I do.

The future certainly isn't inaccessible in the sense that you can speculate about it. It's just that often we can't know all factors that go into it. Sometimes it's possible though, at least with a high likelihood.

Or hey, you could simply have no idea what it's like to have a perceptual landscape in which time isn't primarily linear.

You're doing a lot of correcting about lived experiences you clearly haven't had.

You need to support your Ni perception with evidence. Or, at the minimum, provide the data that the conclusion eventually comes from. I know for me that's the only way to accept a Ni conclusion.

Wow, this is a great place for one of the emoticons that I saw when randomly browsing to see what's in the list:

:BangHead:

======================================

I wish I had cause to use a cuter one, like:

:bunnyglee:

or even

:pinkcuffs:

But alas, no.

(I have been reduced to using emoticons instead of words. What has become of me?)
 

valaki

New member
Joined
Jan 1, 2014
Messages
940
MBTI Type
SeNi
Enneagram
8+7
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
(Apologies for the antagonistic stance right now, but I'm pissed off by something outside of this)

What do you actually think Ti is?

Hey no worries :)

As for Ti, I guess the official MBTI definition is pretty short and non-specific. I personally really like Jung's and Lenore's descriptions. Keeping it in mind that they are not the same, I like Lenore's the most. By "like", what I really mean is that these descriptions talk about something that I recognize in myself too. :)

As for which definition is "best", well I can't decide that as I can't pull objective evidence out of my ass to support my reasoning for you. :D

So what about you?

I still have my questions for you as above ;)


My Ni works like an assistant. Like here are some insights related to what's happening right now. It references a lot of things that are happening to my Ti database and makes spider web connections. I can be talking to someone and my Ni picks up all these indicators of a personality type from how they are acting or how another person of this type acted in the same way. It also does a lot of predicting but not very far into the future just what is happening in that moment. I'm also good at reading if someone is lying. So yea basically I can read peoples minds and do a lot of sherlock holmes stuff. I can know someone better than they know themselves.

On the down side to think about stuff in the future takes me a really long time sometimes. I have to keep coming back to it. I rely heavily on using Ti systems and experience to project far into the future. My Ni can also be super paranoid. It will give me flashes a couple seconds into the future of something going horribly wrong or all the possibilities of stuff that can go wrong in this situation. Sometimes shows me too many possibilities when it wasn't really needed over complicating things. I find it best to actively ignore it sometimes as I find it's a type of fear. It works best when stuff is in motion or I'm attacking a problem.

Thanks for the description. So can you sum it up as to how do you differentiate between Ni and Ti? This does seem like they are really intertwined for you.
 

Alea_iacta_est

New member
Joined
Dec 3, 2013
Messages
1,834
Hey no worries :)

As for Ti, I guess the official MBTI definition is pretty short and non-specific. I personally really like Jung's and Lenore's descriptions. Keeping it in mind that they are not the same, I like Lenore's the most. By "like", what I really mean is that these descriptions talk about something that I recognize in myself too. :)

As for which definition is "best", well I can't decide that as I can't pull objective evidence out of my ass to support my reasoning for you. :D

So what about you?

I still have my questions for you as above ;)




Thanks for the description. So can you sum it up as to how do you differentiate between Ni and Ti? This does seem like they are really intertwined for you.

I currently comprehend Ti as precision. Ti wants to organize all of the information it takes in and put it into little mental boxes to categorize each and every little detail to create the perfect system where each part in it is clearly defined.

Ti types reading this, back me up or provide your own explanation, please.
 

valaki

New member
Joined
Jan 1, 2014
Messages
940
MBTI Type
SeNi
Enneagram
8+7
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I'm finding myself deeply bored with this topic ^ ^ as you want to discuss it.

You clearly misunderstood my intentions or something or you wouldn't have got so offended. I was honestly curious as to how you see these things, that is, why you think it's just a cultural thing etc etc.


I always appreciate it when someone who isn't a Ni-dom "corrects" me on what my dominant function operates for me. But sarcasm aside: It may seem magical to you, but that's a matter of a flaw in your perception or understanding. Not my problem.

It doesn't seem magical to me and you completely misunderstood what I meant.

I was just correcting your wording so it's more clear, not the content.


And I'd try to share more about what Ni-Se perception is for me as a Ni-dom/Se-inf, but really don't feel like being corrected again by someone who doesn't share this configuration and the experience, but feels they know it better than I do.

No, I didn't think I knew it better; and don't make assumptions about what I would be doing!


Or hey, you could simply have no idea what it's like to have a perceptual landscape in which time isn't primarily linear.

Time doesn't actually exist. So now what?


You're doing a lot of correcting about lived experiences you clearly haven't had.

Praytell where was I talking about lived experiences? Let alone correct them???


Wow, this is a great place for one of the emoticons that I saw when randomly browsing to see what's in the list:

Well it's not my problem if your head now hurts because you decided to get angry and self-destructive instead of first attempting to clarify what I really meant.

My intention with that suggestion was helpful; suggesting a way that will help you get your Ni perceptions more easily accepted by others. You didn't talk about what Ni-Se integration meant to you, in my interpretation what I suggested would exactly be that, integrating Se with Ni.

Also my suggestion comes from my own experience, I can sometimes have hunches but I do always try to clarify them with data first before relying on them. So, I assume it's helpful when explaining it to others as well.
 

valaki

New member
Joined
Jan 1, 2014
Messages
940
MBTI Type
SeNi
Enneagram
8+7
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I currently comprehend Ti as precision. Ti wants to organize all of the information it takes in and put it into little mental boxes to categorize each and every little detail to create the perfect system where each part in it is clearly defined.

I actually do that but this is a really complex topic to be honest :) I'm very critical of most of the actively used categories out there when comparing them to the idea of an ideal, that is, what a good category should be. I do have my own solutions to this issue though ;)

Anyway I still ask you why that would be deductive logic...? I'm still curious if this was your own conclusion based on readings or if you actually saw this definition somewhere. Not that it matters too much but I can get really upset over it when it's not specified exactly which theory some statement comes from.
 

Alea_iacta_est

New member
Joined
Dec 3, 2013
Messages
1,834
I actually do that but this is a really complex topic to be honest :) I'm very critical of most of the actively used categories out there when comparing them to the idea of an ideal, that is, what a good category should be. I do have my own solutions to this issue though ;)

Anyway I still ask you why that would be deductive logic...? I'm still curious if this was your own conclusion based on readings or if you actually saw this definition somewhere. Not that it matters too much but I can get really upset over it when it's not specified exactly which theory some statement comes from.

I don't remember the exact sources I got it from, but it is ingrained in my mind in such a way that it has to be external information.

The connection is that Precision is precisely (lol) how deductive logic functions. It starts out with a general principle, applies it, and gets a specific conclusion. Ti does near the same thing, it starts out with general information and gets a specific conclusion.
 
Top