• 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.

Introverted intuition

Avocado

Permabanned
Joined
Jun 28, 2013
Messages
3,794
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
7w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
Is this true? The way I have come to view introverted vs extroverted functions is that introverted ones are more mysterious to the outside observer. It's happening on the inside and is unique to the individual using it, so people have a hard time understanding. That doesn't mean it's more complex, just more mysterious and less apparent.

Also, introverted functions tend to be more linear. This is probably largely because of the rapidly changing nature of the external world when compared to ones internal thoughts. We can much better control the diversions that take place in our heads than we can all the new stimuli we're constantly bombarded with on the outside. That makes extroverted functions quicker, farther reaching in multiple directions, and their complexity is found in the sheer amount of different factors and options it can hold and process at a given time. Their divergent, far-reaching energy shouldn't be interpreted as simplicity.

This leads into introverted functions being more linear. They're able to build upon one or a few choice tracks of thought over long periods of time. They're slower moving, more concentrated energy. Sure, maybe over time, there's a point at which an introverted function has been pruned and developed for so long that it surpasses the extroverted functions' capacity for information held at a given time, but for the most part, I'd argue that it's the linear, concentrated nature of introverted functions paired with their somewhat hidden nature that makes them seem more complex.

That sounds about right...
 

RaptorWizard

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 19, 2012
Messages
5,895
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
I think Ni is very much like an entire collection of video games stacked across many shelves with varying levels and shifting contexts in action.

Xbox 360
make-your-xbox-360-games-region-free.w654.jpg
 

yeghor

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 21, 2013
Messages
4,276

I believe Ni gazes on what comes thru Fe and Se in INFJs and Te and Se in INTJs...Ni gazes on what's within...I think that also gives Ni-dom function some kind of super-ego role...an inner critic of some sorts cause it also gazes on the self of the Ni-dom person...I don't know if it's the same for INTJs...Perhaps INTJs berate themselves more for ending up incorrect rather than for moralistic reasons...Anyway, INFJs, I believe, analyze the information allowed within by using Ni-Ti functions...Ni-dom function does the overall assessment whereas Ti-tert does the detail work?

Ne other hand gazes on what's outside the Ne-dom person...To be able to perceive more, it needs to invoke more reactions (i.e. information) from the external object...So Ne-doms use Ne to seek out more information from the external object and then analyze that data thru Ti in case ENTPs and thru Fi in case of ENFPs...In such a use, I think Ne does not serve as a superego...

Assuming that Ni-dom function is related to superego, those who have Ni-inferior would be very irritated with or allergic to superego...They wouldn't like being morally confined...

I also likened Ni to a passive sonar and Ne an active sonar in another thread so I am putting it forward once more for discussion...perhaps it may spark some more ideas...


It may be related with the lack of strong Fi function (i.e. internal/personal values, a finely defined sense of self and ego)...INFJs' egos are more malleable wrt to a person with strong Fi...

And I feel the same with Ni-Ti internal analysis mechanism...I do not store detailed information, I just momentarily analyze what's within me at that moment and then discard it once it's analyzed...I think I store the result of the analysis in some kind of essential pattern form for easier storage and recall for future use though...

So Ni-dom function feels to me like a synthesizer of some sorts...By synthesizer I do not mean the music instrument but a device that compiles up relatively high amounts of data...
 
Last edited:

hjgbujhghg

I am
Joined
Jun 6, 2013
Messages
3,333
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w3
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
I think Ni is very much like an entire collection of video games stacked across many shelves with varying levels and shifting contexts in action.

Xbox 360
make-your-xbox-360-games-region-free.w654.jpg

I could actually see this as Si
 

Werebudgie

I want my account deleted
Joined
Jan 20, 2014
Messages
398
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
6w5
I always dismiss the information. And I'm starting to realize one of the reasons is because I just don't sit still long enough to let things come to me. But I also have to think everything through. Everything must have evidence. I have been trying to let myself trust it more though. I find it to be difficult. :/

I find it difficult too. And it's my dominant function and very much home to me perceptually! The high cost of the assimilation is how much I've internalized pushing against such trust. I know I did the best I could when I chose to assimilate, but undoing the harm that's come from that path is a long and difficult process for me. I began this process in 2001 and am nowhere near the kind of reflex-based flexible trust-based movement that is truly organic to me. Getting there, though.

It's difficult to describe by writing it, but Ni even visually looks less reaction-based than Se. (I dated an Ni dom for over 6 years, and an Se dom for 4....we played A LOT of Halo. But the Ni dom almost always beat everyone, hands down.)

Not that any of that is real data or anything....but I am just saying that visually....their flow even looks different. Just thought it was interesting. :)

Could you describe more about the how the flow visually looks for Ni and for Se? I think this is really interesting.
 

Evo

Unapologetic being
Joined
Jul 1, 2011
Messages
3,160
MBTI Type
XNTJ
Enneagram
1w9
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Is this true? The way I have come to view introverted vs extroverted functions is that introverted ones are more mysterious to the outside observer. It's happening on the inside and is unique to the individual using it, so people have a hard time understanding. That doesn't mean it's more complex, just more mysterious and less apparent.

Also, introverted functions tend to be more linear. This is probably largely because of the rapidly changing nature of the external world when compared to ones internal thoughts. We can much better control the diversions that take place in our heads than we can all the new stimuli we're constantly bombarded with on the outside. That makes extroverted functions quicker, farther reaching in multiple directions, and their complexity is found in the sheer amount of different factors and options it can hold and process at a given time. Their divergent, far-reaching energy shouldn't be interpreted as simplicity.

This leads into introverted functions being more linear. They're able to build upon one or a few choice tracks of thought over long periods of time. They're slower moving, more concentrated energy. Sure, maybe over time, there's a point at which an introverted function has been pruned and developed for so long that it surpasses the extroverted functions' capacity for information held at a given time, but for the most part, I'd argue that it's the linear, concentrated nature of introverted functions paired with their somewhat hidden nature that makes them seem more complex.

I dont' disagree with what you're saying. I'm taking what you're saying as it looks more complex because of how linear it is, but it's not really more complex...Is that right?

I think we need to substitute the word "complex" with the word "depth"

The introverted functions are rediculously deep and vast water....I could swim ALL DAY, ALL year in a single thought sometimes (or linear stream that that though provokes.) But Se on the other hand...1) thinks, 2) loses patience, 3) then needs new stimulation. (I know that's not the exact process...but I'm simplifying cause I don't have much time right now.) They're (the extraverted functions) not shallow waters...but more...slight waters. They just are not as involved. Hmm. I'm hoping you're getting my point, because I'm not coming up with many examples right now. Sorry.

Anyways to quote myself from the "Why do ppl hate INTJ's?" thread:

In a similar way, I think that most extraverted functions do not have the patience to wait around for their introverted counterparts. Sort of like Amargith said. So to continue the thought...Ne doesn't have patience for Ni, Te doesn't have patience for Ti, Fe doesn't have patience for Fi, and Se doesn't have patience for Si.

^ This is what I mean. There is definately a difference between the extraverted and introverted functions. And it's sort of related to depth and slightness.

It's the same reason why many Fi users think that Fe is shallow.

In a sense...Fe is only looking at the surface. (In literal terms...) It's looking at your mannerisms on the outside. But an introverted feeler can know what another person is feeling by the mannerisms AND it looks deeper. Does this makes sense?

I find it difficult too. And it's my dominant function and very much home to me perceptually! The high cost of the assimilation is how much I've internalized pushing against such trust. I know I did the best I could when I chose to assimilate, but undoing the harm that's come from that path is a long and difficult process for me. I began this process in 2001 and am nowhere near the kind of reflex-based flexible trust-based movement that is truly organic to me. Getting there, though.

Ugh I know! I get frustrated when I don't trust it. Which is often. It's almost like I've been ignoring it for so long I don't even know how to identify it :(

I have been workin on this too. But not near as long as you.

Could you describe more about the how the flow visually looks for Ni and for Se? I think this is really interesting.

Just that it seems to me, that Ni has a pattern. Almost like it repeats its pattern so much that it becomes just what they do. It's a flow. They perfect the flow. It's all about perfection as a whole.

Se. Much more reactionary. They say "Oh A is happening, I must do B!" They seem to be more consciously deciding where to go. It's more about perfection right here and now with every move.

I know that when I play I need that pattern.

It's really hard to explain. lol
 

valaki

New member
Joined
Jan 1, 2014
Messages
940
MBTI Type
SeNi
Enneagram
8+7
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I don't know. The practical implications are where I let the peasantry frolic.

lol


Irrational is not really a great descriptor for any type; although I think the idea of accepting contradictions as part of reality gets hinted at with that term, and so it does provide insight into what perceiving mentalities can be like.

What kind of contradictions for example?


So in Jung's view, a rational type uses lines of reasoning to come to a conclusion. A perceiving type "sees" or is "aware" of things, be it objects or concepts. That certainly can be a conclusion or judgement.
I agree that what these Ni-dom describe sounds like a form of judgment. It's part of what constitutes the "J mentality" in MBTI. Pi is paired with Je & together they form "J personalities" as far as outward behavior goes. This is also why socionics is WRONG :p .

I don't think either MBTI or socionics is "better" on the J/P thing. I think they both got it wrong. ;)

When describing Ni itself, it shouldn't be including any MBTI J though, after all that's the Te/Fe, supposedly. So that part didn't make a lot of sense honestly.


Internally, they may not experience it as judgement, hence the hesitancy to not express it until it's more of a justifiable conclusion (?). But they do seem to experience it as a reality, which has implied judgement even if they detach it from being their own mind's conclusion. It's like looking at an object, say a blue coffee mug, and noting it is blue. You wouldn't say you are judging it is blue, as you don't experience your mind as reasoning over it, but still you assigning a judgement category. It seems to me that Pi-dom have a way of "seeing" in their own mind that is just like the Se types sees the object & really comes to an immediate conclusion that it is XYZ. It is reality to them not a choice... and in being unquestioned, it's really a judgment of sorts of what is real & what is not.

Yes this is what I was originally talking about :)


But that's also why IxxPs may find vocalized thoughts taken as judgements when they are explorations - because of the prevalent Je mentality. I may hesitate less than an IxxJ because my mentality is not to order things outwardly, so it doesn't occur to me a verbalized thought is seen as a judgment; this especially gets INxPs in trouble sometimes :p. Also, INxPs may question whether or not what is "seen" is undeniably there :p.

Hmm, I'm not sure I understood you here. Do you mean that when IxxP's talk about stuff, other people may see it as judgements while they weren't really?


Um, no.... My mind is pretty colorful & "populated". I'm a visual thinker & I have an inner dialogue too. I can think without words, for sure, in visuals or formless abstraction. I don't consider the latter to be "blank".

Well why don't you see it as "blank"? After all, your conscious mind is empty. The non-coded stuff is somewhat unconscious. Also, when I don't think at all, which happens pretty often, it's all "blank" in the sense you are using the word. I just see the world and stuff and not think. And the same when reading a fiction book, etc. etc.


And refuse to mistake dirt for gold.

Yeah me too :)

I don't know what's better though, make the mistake of not noticing something or make the mistake of noticing something where there isn't anything.


Just that it seems to me, that Ni has a pattern. Almost like it repeats its pattern so much that it becomes just what they do. It's a flow. They perfect the flow. It's all about perfection as a whole.

Se. Much more reactionary. They say "Oh A is happening, I must do B!" They seem to be more consciously deciding where to go. It's more about perfection right here and now with every move.

I know that when I play I need that pattern.

It's really hard to explain. lol

Hm I don't see Se as something involving conscious decision at all. Things, including decisions on what to do etc, just "happen". It's unconscious processing, gut stuff. It's not Ni though because it's about this in-the-moment stuff based on the context of the current environment.

When I play a game I do the Se reactionary thing first but over time I develop effective patterns and just use those. Isn't everyone like that, though?
 

valaki

New member
Joined
Jan 1, 2014
Messages
940
MBTI Type
SeNi
Enneagram
8+7
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Not from what I've seen

Well ok, not everyone then perhaps, I still feel though that this can't be categorized so neatly under the MBTI system.
 

Evo

Unapologetic being
Joined
Jul 1, 2011
Messages
3,160
MBTI Type
XNTJ
Enneagram
1w9
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Well ok, not everyone then perhaps, I still feel though that this can't be categorized so neatly under the MBTI system.

I know what you mean.

I have not met enough ppl and watched them play to have any real date or anything lol. But the real reason I started noticing it is cause it has to do with their hands.

There is definately a difference between the movement of an Se dom compared to an Ni dom though. Like even when they're playing, their hands movements are different.

It has to do with the same thing.

Like Se is less about thinking and more about going with the flow and dealing with things AS they come.

Ni's different. It's like....buh. I don't know. More predetermined almost....

Anyways like I said, hard to explain. So I wont continue.
 

valaki

New member
Joined
Jan 1, 2014
Messages
940
MBTI Type
SeNi
Enneagram
8+7
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I know what you mean.

I have not met enough ppl and watched them play to have any real date or anything lol. But the real reason I started noticing it is cause it has to do with their hands.

There is definately a difference between the movement of an Se dom compared to an Ni dom though. Like even when they're playing, their hands movements are different.

It has to do with the same thing.

Like Se is less about thinking and more about going with the flow and dealing with things AS they come.

Ni's different. It's like....buh. I don't know. More predetermined almost....

Anyways like I said, hard to explain. So I wont continue.

Interesting about the hands. I think I maybe understand what you mean about that part. How does it tell you though that Se-doms make choices more consciously? Sorry this may sound very nitpicky-ish. If you tell me in response that you've actually asked Se-doms about the workings of their minds in terms of that, then fine :) Otherwise I dislike guessing about what goes on in a person's mind.
 

Evo

Unapologetic being
Joined
Jul 1, 2011
Messages
3,160
MBTI Type
XNTJ
Enneagram
1w9
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Interesting about the hands. I think I maybe understand what you mean about that part. How does it tell you though that Se-doms make choices more consciously? Sorry this may sound very nitpicky-ish. If you tell me in response that you've actually asked Se-doms about the workings of their minds in terms of that, then fine :) Otherwise I dislike guessing about what goes on in a person's mind.

The Se said they can predict off of their experience so it's like taking things as they come, but they're still prepared cause their experience. Ni I didn't ask I don't think :thinking: This was a while ago though. And I can't ask any now.

The Si I can ask though. He's the best help :)
 

valaki

New member
Joined
Jan 1, 2014
Messages
940
MBTI Type
SeNi
Enneagram
8+7
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
The Se said they can predict off of their experience so it's like taking things as they come, but they're still prepared cause their experience.

Yes that's what I talked about earlier, about developing effective patterns, I use them like this. Though not in a really conscious fashion


Ni I didn't ask I don't think :thinking: This was a while ago though. And I can't ask any now.

Too bad hey :p :/


The Si I can ask though. He's the best help :)

Sure, if you want. :)
 

Evo

Unapologetic being
Joined
Jul 1, 2011
Messages
3,160
MBTI Type
XNTJ
Enneagram
1w9
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Yes that's what I talked about earlier, about developing effective patterns, I use them like this. Though not in a really conscious fashion

Yea, sorry I didn't have time before to explain much.

It's not a completely conscious process after they have a lot of practice cause it doesn't need to be.

Anyways this is an example of exactly how my mind works when playing video games, I couldn't find anything better to demonstrate what I'm talking about.

But if you skip to 56:50 minutes into it, you will see what I mean : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MGfhQTbcqmA

That flow of a pattern is what I'm talking about. The "circuit" that he's talking about. That is how I play.

The Ni dom seemed to do that kind of circuit a little...but was way more flexible than me.

And Se doms just don't do that.

Does that clear it up better?
 

yeghor

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 21, 2013
Messages
4,276
I believe this may help to demonstrate how Ni-dom looks from outside...:

Check what he says @0:42...

and check where/what he's gazing at @1:18...

And authentic Fe from @1:30 on...


There's a definite chemistry between Gandalf and Galadriel in the movie...I do not know if it's the same in the books...

I wonder what's Galadriel's type...? She seems to know just what to say to build Gandalf up and inspire/motivate him...


The belowgiven clips demonstrating the chemistry between Gandalf and Galadriel also always give me a chuckle :D


 
Last edited:

Z Buck McFate

Pepperidge Farm remembers.
Joined
Aug 25, 2009
Messages
6,048
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I see it in general, meaning in the cultural system in which I live (I live in the US, which I see as in many ways a cultural child of Europe at its core) overall. Certainly in this forum, but I don't think it's specific to here. The general/cultural pattern I see is a actually two-sided coin: on one side, Ni is trivialized, devalued etc, on the other side it is exotified and mystified/New-Age-ified. Both are routes to distortion and they work together somehow.

I’ve been thinking about this- I think I know what you mean, but I’m not sure how to describe it.

Several years ago I had a visceral reaction to reading Piaget’s The Child’s Conception of the World. A problem with Piaget is that there’s no accounting for abstract thinking- he interpreted what children were saying very literally. When children said that the things in dreams “really happened”, Piaget interpreted this as children believing the events in their dreams “really happened” in waking life, outside their dreams. (He does this repeatedly- with all sorts of things, he interprets what they’re saying in a very literal way and mystifies their reasoning skills as being different….when really, imo, it’s just that they haven’t yet refined their ability to articulate subtle distinctions.) I actually got really angry reading the book- it gave me flashbacks to my own childhood and being constantly misunderstood by people (in precisely the way he was misunderstanding).

One of my earliest memories is of getting angry at my mom and sister because they didn’t understand what I was talking about (I must have been around 4 yo). I kept telling them I wanted to watch a show on TV, and all I could think to say to describe it is “it’s real, but it’s not real.” And I kept trying variations of that: “There were people there, but there weren’t PEOPLE there.” I was talking about cartoons. In retrospect, it’s understandable why they had no idea what I was trying to describe- but I can very clearly remember often getting angry and frustrated to get a reaction like “What’s that? Timmy fell down the well again?” when I’d try to communicate because I felt like I was being clear.

I have no idea if this is a common problem for Ni doms growing up though. I have always felt like most people seem to be able to take easily communicating for granted- and as such, they expect a certain kind of efficiency (?) that I can’t really keep up with? I’m not sure that makes sense, and it’s not even entirely about communication so much as overall interaction and the ability to make sense of other people’s words and behavior. It’s like there’s this big invisible metronome somewhere and other people don’t have nearly as much trouble keeping up with it as I do (i.e. being told when and how long to focus on something, and being told specifically what to focus on, etc). It’s not that I expect the world to revolve around me, but I’d like to as least make a pocket around myself where I can do things at my own speed- and even that seems difficult sometimes.


That thin slices thing, it sort of sounds like a way of judging, the wikipedia article even uses the word judge. I understang with jungian theory it's not judging but quite honestly this use of terminology is very confusing. If you make an initial assessment and are instantly convinced it's correct, that's a judgement in my book. How in Jung's view could it not be a judgement?

I’m not entirely sure what you’re asking here. It sounds to me like you’re asking how this could describe Ni when it sounds like a judging process? (If not, disregard the following explanation.) I don’t think Ni is the aspect that scrambles to come up with an explanation- I think Ni is the thing that drops “If A, then Q” on the table and the judging functions then must scramble around to find the linear progression which led from A to Q.

Everybody does the ‘thin-slicing’ thing. I think that each ‘type’ probably has its own criteria which regularly gets focused on.

I really like your position. I guess I always have the patience to explain my position (and in turn, hear the other person's), it's just that quite a few other people don't have patience to hear it or even consider the idea of listening, let alone consider the idea of explaining their own position instead of just giving up too fast.

What I could learn better though is, how to figure out some positions of people in some cases, where it's possible to put it together from the data available. Really cool you try to do that.

Do you feel this limits your Ni too much though? Does it never turn out that it was a good idea trying to figure out what the other person's position REALLY was?

Maybe a better way of saying it is that I think it’s important to take responsibility for the assumptions we make. Jumping to quick conclusions- and throwing a lot of negative emotional charge at someone because of that hasty conclusion- is (imo) just a shitty way to treat people.

As an oversimplified example: say someone steps on my foot. I could either instantly react and explain to that person how careless I think it was for them to step on my foot….or I could stop and look for the reasons why it might have happened. If something stands out (like, say- someone on the other side of the person, physically pushing them in my direction) as a cause existing beyond that person, then I can save us both the trouble of that conversation (e.g. “Goddamnit, why are you so careless?!” / “It wasn’t my fault! That person pushed me!!”). Those conversations are so exhausting- I really can’t handle too much interaction with the kinds of people who can’t put that stuff together on their own before saying something.

I think it’s a bad idea to ‘figure out someone else’s position’ in a non-dialogical sort of way, to make assumptions about someone else’s position and neither talk about it nor listen to any disagreement they have about it, for probably obvious reasons- but specifically what I was talking about was stopping to consider the larger ‘cause and effect’ picture before throwing a bunch of negative emotional charge at someone. It’s important to make sure what we’ve “figured out” actually does match what goes on inside the other person- but I was specifically referring to figuring out how to avoid senselessly throwing negative emotional charge around.
 

Werebudgie

I want my account deleted
Joined
Jan 20, 2014
Messages
398
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
6w5
I’ve been thinking about this- I think I know what you mean, but I’m not sure how to describe it.

Several years ago I had a visceral reaction to reading Piaget’s The Child’s Conception of the World. A problem with Piaget is that there’s no accounting for abstract thinking- he interpreted what children were saying very literally. When children said that the things in dreams “really happened”, Piaget interpreted this as children believing the events in their dreams “really happened” in waking life, outside their dreams. (He does this repeatedly- with all sorts of things, he interprets what they’re saying in a very literal way and mystifies their reasoning skills as being different….when really, imo, it’s just that they haven’t yet refined their ability to articulate subtle distinctions.) I actually got really angry reading the book- it gave me flashbacks to my own childhood and being constantly misunderstood by people (in precisely the way he was misunderstanding).One of my earliest memories is of getting angry at my mom and sister because they didn’t understand what I was talking about (I must have been around 4 yo). I kept telling them I wanted to watch a show on TV, and all I could think to say to describe it is “it’s real, but it’s not real.” And I kept trying variations of that: “There were people there, but there weren’t PEOPLE there.” I was talking about cartoons. In retrospect, it’s understandable why they had no idea what I was trying to describe- but I can very clearly remember often getting angry and frustrated to get a reaction like “What’s that? Timmy fell down the well again?” when I’d try to communicate because I felt like I was being clear.

I have no idea if this is a common problem for Ni doms growing up though. I have always felt like most people seem to be able to take easily communicating for granted- and as such, they expect a certain kind of efficiency (?) that I can’t really keep up with? I’m not sure that makes sense, and it’s not even entirely about communication so much as overall interaction and the ability to make sense of other people’s words and behavior. It’s like there’s this big invisible metronome somewhere and other people don’t have nearly as much trouble keeping up with it as I do (i.e. being told when and how long to focus on something, and being told specifically what to focus on, etc). It’s not that I expect the world to revolve around me, but I’d like to as least make a pocket around myself where I can do things at my own speed- and even that seems difficult sometimes.

Oh, Z Buck, I was actually in the kitchen making coffee before I turned on the computer and before I read your comment here, thinking about what seems to be this very topic as it relates to my life now in a very personal/immediate way. In fact, I realize now I woke up thinking about this. Please tell me if I'm misunderstanding what you mean, though.

So ... On one layer, I've been wondering why I can't stand having my words and articulated experiences translated back to me or others after being run through a framework that's alien to me (and thus distorted). I mean, it gets to me more than most things can. On another layer, I've been struggling with trying to lift some pretty important stuff into consciousness to see if I should try to articulate it to someone I love, but feel like it's taking me so long just to pinpoint what it is in a way I could try to speak. I actually was thinking about that piece in terms of speed, like I can feel so clearly what's going on but I cannot for the life of me figure out if or how to actually articulate it in a way that has any chance of being understood for what it is - and this is taking so long. And on a third layer, the actual specific issue that I'm struggling with actually comes from a conflict based on this very pattern to begin with, me saying things that the other person really didn't get, things that were fed back to me in twisted form and this was weeks ago and I still haven't been able to pin down what I would say about it if I would say anything.

I do think speed may be one of the conceptual keys here. I'm thinking of the discussion in this thread - I'm paraphrasing here - of the Ni-dom self as "blank" and receiving constant dabs of ink (information) that can cohere into meaningful patterns in our perception based on our specific location (specific location is a big part of how I think about subjectivity for Ni). I compare the speed at which I process information to, say, my INFP partner. Compared to me, she is very quick to conclude that she knows what's happening. She has said she "fills in the blanks" using various tools (Si database with patterned data from her past experiences, for example) to come to conclusions. I go so much slower. I can't force/create patterns I can only let them emerge, and they do so at their own speed regardless of what I want. And then trying to get that perception into a form where I can actually articulate it, and then having that communication actually understood for what it is ... yeah.
 

grey_beard

The Typing Tabby
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
1,478
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
*nods* makes sense. But at the same time ... if I understand it correctly, Ne also has a "perceive and go with the flow" quality that's like the other side of the coin. (the metaphor of currents flowing like on a river and perceiving or following them somehow). In feel, it seems like it's a similar kind of thing as the Ni blankness but just from some other angle or something. Same category, different specifics. I could be wrong. eta: or maybe its more of a mirror image: Ni combines blankness and active approach to action, Ne combines flooding and passive approach to action. Or maybe neither of these things.

[MENTION=20789]Werebudgie[/MENTION], [MENTION=6561]OrangeAppled[/MENTION] --
Ne is like the mathematical method of simulated evolutionary methods: take a gazillion trials, and compare the results of each one, and with each comparison, keep the one that does a little better job, to zero in on the correct answer. You start out all over the map, and don't know where in advance where you're gonna go.
Ni is like a "steepest descents" method: suddenly *knowing* the shape of things, and from that *knowing* as a result, the direction you ought to go, to find the optimal answer.
They arrive at the same place, but each using a completely different method.
 

OrangeAppled

Sugar Hiccup
Joined
Mar 20, 2009
Messages
7,626
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
lol
What kind of contradictions for example?

I can't think of a direct example. But it seems a lot of Ni-isms are "paradoxes".
Just for contrast, a Ne type can hold several possibilities to be, well, possible, even if they contradict. This is more "shallow" in a sense, so it's not so hard to grasp. But with Ni, and arguably Si, there's an ability to see it not as possibility, but reality. I guess it's just the experience of reality being subjective, a matter of interpretation more than objective fact.

IMO, this makes the Ni+Te combo more interesting in a person because the functions are almost checking each other. I suppose that's what auxiliary functions do (as a complement & "balance"), but it's very obvious in that particular one. Or perhaps there's an advantage that they prove their "checks" to others with Te. NFs have such a disadvantage there. Even INTPs have more frustration.

I don't think either MBTI or socionics is "better" on the J/P thing. I think they both got it wrong. ;)
I find each limited, but insightful, and when combined, do a pretty good job of explaining the connection between mindset & visible personality. Not complete or without flaw by any means.


When describing Ni itself, it shouldn't be including any MBTI J though, after all that's the Te/Fe, supposedly. So that part didn't make a lot of sense honestly.

The point I was making is that MBTI J is NOT just a result of Te/Fe, but a result of a whole mindset which includes Pi. The J outer personality comes from Je + Pi, not just Pi. This is probably why you see & agree with the below.

Internally, they may not experience it as judgement, hence the hesitancy to not express it until it's more of a justifiable conclusion (?). But they do seem to experience it as a reality, which has implied judgement even if they detach it from being their own mind's conclusion. It's like looking at an object, say a blue coffee mug, and noting it is blue. You wouldn't say you are judging it is blue, as you don't experience your mind as reasoning over it, but still you assigning a judgement category. It seems to me that Pi-dom have a way of "seeing" in their own mind that is just like the Se types sees the object & really comes to an immediate conclusion that it is XYZ. It is reality to them not a choice... and in being unquestioned, it's really a judgment of sorts of what is real & what is not.

Yes this is what I was originally talking about :)

There are characteristics of MBTI "J" in Pi thinking. It's not just a result of Je.

Hmm, I'm not sure I understood you here. Do you mean that when IxxP's talk about stuff, other people may see it as judgements while they weren't really?
Yes


Well why don't you see it as "blank"? After all, your conscious mind is empty. The non-coded stuff is somewhat unconscious. Also, when I don't think at all, which happens pretty often, it's all "blank" in the sense you are using the word. I just see the world and stuff and not think. And the same when reading a fiction book, etc. etc.

It doesn't feel "empty", just formless. Perhaps we are not speaking of the same thing & I don't really experience what you do.
 

Alea_iacta_est

New member
Joined
Dec 3, 2013
Messages
1,834
I think this description I have stolen from PerC might be of interest in this thread.

Ni
Ni is a sub-conscious filtering and collecting of correlations; it filters incidences to detect underlying principals, laws of nature, or reoccurring themes. It can be experienced as a sense of something that causes one to act on a hunch. Sometimes these correlations coalesce into symbols ahead of the Ni user having any explanation for why. Ni users often express a sense of storing up or mentally flagging data and experiences that can be fully digested later, or that they trust will be available for useful recall at an appropriate time.

Ni dominant personalities often seek time to bring sub-conscious correlations out in the open, handing these hunches or symbols off to what Jung labels judging functions; this can be done internally or outside themselves for conscious interpretation, to be verified as causative, relevant or true. Conversely, this “sense of how things work” can make them quick to intuitively grasp a process without the time it takes for a full walk through or a detailed explanation.

I think this description is a fair assessment, but what I find incredibly intriguing is the portion I have underlined. I never thought this would be a connection to a Cognitive Function, but I've always done this, and do this frequently. When I see new information or hear something important, I can actually "flag" that information and tell myself to recall it at a certain date, and it would indeed pop into my mind at the exact time I needed it (once I realized I could do this, I began thinking of things to remember when I lay on my deathbed, and now I'm worried what might surface there). I can tell myself in the morning that I need to get something done tomorrow morning, and I can and probably would forget about it for the rest of the day, but then come morning I would instantly recall it. To add to this, I had an interesting morning when I was running late for something and I was trying to remember what all I needed, and then everything I realized I needed popped into my head like a bombardment of information, and I knew exactly what needed to be done in what order to ensure that I reach the place on time. Anyone else resonate with this at all?
 
Top