User Tag List

123 Last

Results 1 to 10 of 21

  1. #1
    The Green Jolly Robin H.
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Posts
    1,683

    Default NE vs. NI here we go again!

    NE is multiple frameworks. For instance, a framework is a way of doing things or a set of rules to follow that provide examples, maybe.

    A framework in accounting is generally accepted accounting principles.

    Learning one framework and improving it is NI...or using your imagination to navigate the framework is NI.

    Learning multiple frameworks is NE. ENTP's are known at being good at sales and science. How can this be? Well they tend to learn multiple frameworks and intigrate them.

    Example: Electrical engineering is taught and applied according to the framework which is schematics, electricity, etc...

    Biology has it's own framework. The two overlap...there is such a thing as bioelectricity. Electrical principles are involved in living organisms...

    SO an ENTP is more of an inventor who bridges the gap between different sciences if we are just typing him to a high powered NE in science.

    But an entp in accoutning would reconcile GAAP, generally accepted accounting principles, to another framework like, international accounting principles.

    Hence NE + TI provides for a highly analytical mind that knows the differences and similarities between systems where as NI and TE provides for a highly analytical mind that provides for differences and similarities within a system.

    I'm off to see a movie with my pops...let me know what you think about my NE vs. NI thread - I think this is the best way to look at it because the framework is a great way to see how the two differ.
    "i shut the door and in the morning
    it was open
    -the end"




    Olemn slammed his hammer and from the sparks on the metal of his anvil came the spheres of the heavens.

    Sayrah blew life into the spheres and they moved. From her wheel she weaved the names of people in to mystery.

  2. #2
    darkened dreams labyrinthine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    isfp
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    8,586

    Default

    Awesome thread, although I'm not sure what the "here we go again" refers to. I've never seen a thread like this before. The judging functions are more often contrasted. I find both interesting and feel a lot of kinship with Ne, although it's more like an awesome head trip for me since Ni tends to be a bit more structured like a tree, and Ne is a bit more like a daisy chain that can find an abstract connection between any two random concepts. There is a flexibility and agility with Ne that is really interesting to me. Both Ni and Ne internalize everything they encounter that is of the abstract realm of patterns and interrelationships. Ne is much more spontaneous and can readily find any connection, but Ni takes more time to internalize and construct its relationships.
    Step into my metaphysical room of mirrors.
    Fear of reality creates myopic morality
    So I guess it means there is trouble until the robins come
    (from Blue Velvet)

    I want to be just like my mother, even if she is bat-shit crazy.

  3. #3
    Tier 1 Member LunaLuminosity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 so/sp
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    2,484

    Default

    I'm not sure what all this frameworks stuff is. Ne and Ni are both intuition. Ne is directed outward, towards action and influence. And Ni is directed inward, towards concept and meaning. Ne is always keeping an eye out for potential but for Ni potential isn't out there, but within themselves.
    Likes Entropic, SpankyMcFly, labyrinthine liked this post

  4. #4
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LunaLuminosity View Post
    I'm not sure what all this frameworks stuff is. Ne and Ni are both intuition. Ne is directed outward, towards action and influence. And Ni is directed inward, towards concept and meaning. Ne is always keeping an eye out for potential but for Ni potential isn't out there, but within themselves.
    I think that the multiple frameworks thing comes from N being directed towards external world and external world consists of frameworks rather than details when viewed heavily through N and the S comes in abstract form instead of being concrete. Ni on the other hand uses more concrete way of viewing sensations and external world due to Ni pairing with Se, so their approach is more "collect all details and then form an intuitive idea about that". And because the working memory in humans is rather limited, you cant collect all details and yet have strong sense on how different frameworks interact, because in order to see the frameworks enough to be able to work with them properly as wholes, you need to abstract some sensations(leave irrelevant things out).
    Ofc Je vs Ji plays a big role in it because Je is more concerned about the concrete rather than the figuring out the root of things by the process of abstraction.
    Not to mention that Te/Fi vs Fe/Ti are also really different in terms concretism and abstraction. Te is more concerned by the concrete facts and logic and they abstract things based on F judgments. While Fe is more concerned about concrete matters effecting other people personally, like their mood etc. and the abstraction is done based on logic and reason.
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read
    Likes GarrotTheThief, LunaLuminosity liked this post

  5. #5
    Senior Member Entropic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    8w9 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILI Ni
    Posts
    1,199

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GarrotTheThief View Post
    NE is multiple frameworks. For instance, a framework is a way of doing things or a set of rules to follow that provide examples, maybe.

    A framework in accounting is generally accepted accounting principles.
    This doesn't sound like Ne as much as it sounds like Ji, but particularly, Ti. Ne is more about making connections between unrelated phenomena:

    Extraverted Intuition would move us to unify our sense impressions with their larger context, thereby creating new options for meaning and response. For example, as we lie our blanket in the sun, perhaps we hear music in the distance. Someone passing by mentions a great restaurant in town. Suddenly we’re thinking: Hey, there must be an amusement part nearby. If it’s on our way to town, we can check out the rides before we look for the restaurant that passerby was talking about. In fact, maybe the guy knows about other places we should consider. Where did he go?
    Extraverted Intuitives are right-brain types who deal with their sense impressions by unifying them into larger outward patterns. An ENP physician, for example, may realize, with sudden insight, that several unexplained symptoms are actually part of a single disease. As an Extraverted type, the physician has no doubt that the disease. As an Extraverted type, the physician has no doubt that the disease syndrome really exists. The pattern was always there, waiting for someone to discover it. What’s important now is telling others about the discovery—getting people to see the new model offers more options that the old.
    As soon we begin to talk about systems such as frameworks, we end up in the realms of judgement because intuition is irrational, that is, it takes in information and perceives connections in the world as they are. There is no underlying logic or foundation to what is discerned, as much as it is taking in information and observe the world in and of itself, and because it is intuition, understanding intangible connections between that which is physically observable. Judgement, on the other hand, wishes to place things observed into a logical framework in order to make our observations make sense, and in the case of the rational dominant i.e. someone who leads with Ji/Je as their dominant function, they will also apply already known formulae, standards and laws onto the world and wish to shape the world to make it fit the frameworks they've already pre-defined. This is why Jung speaks of the rational type as striving towards a utopian ideal, because the rational type wants the world to live up to certain norms or standards that are, from the perspective of irrationality that is, observing the world as it is without having any pre-conceived notions of how it should be like.

    Learning one framework and improving it is NI...or using your imagination to navigate the framework is NI.
    Sounds like pure Ji, but mostly Ti. Ni isn't so concerned about frameworks because Ni is an irrational function and it gathers information from the collective unconsciousness. It recognizes archetypal patterns in the world. Improving a framework that is, improving logical understanding, refining an idea of how the world should be, that is the realm of rationality. Of seeking to make sense of something. Ni perceives, it understands through various connections that it can observe, but it does not in itself, seek to improve.

    Learning multiple frameworks is NE. ENTP's are known at being good at sales and science. How can this be? Well they tend to learn multiple frameworks and intigrate them.
    No. Anyone can learn multiple frameworks.

    Example: Electrical engineering is taught and applied according to the framework which is schematics, electricity, etc...
    Biology has it's own framework. The two overlap...there is such a thing as bioelectricity. Electrical principles are involved in living organisms...
    Seeing how two different unrelated phenomena got something in common and what connects them is Ne. What you described here with these two paragraphs, is just an example of your own Ne-dominant bias which has nothing to do with Ni in itself. Of course Ni types can deal with multiple frameworks. Any body of science deals with multiple frameworks within that science, no matter how specialized you are. Ni isn't per se specialization either.

    “Extraverted Intuitives are right-brain types who deal with their sense impressions by unifying them into larger outward patterns. An ENP physician, for example, may realize, with sudden insight, that several unexplained symptoms are actually part of a single disease. As an Extraverted type, the physician has no doubt that the disease. As an Extraverted type, the physician has no doubt that the disease syndrome really exists. The pattern was always there, waiting for someone to discover it. What’s important now is telling others about the discovery—getting people to see the new model offers more options that the old” (225).

    “Introverted Intuitives don’t think this way. For INJs, patterns aren’t ‘out there’ in the world, waiting to be discovered. They’re part of us—they way we make sense of the riot of information and energy impinging on our systems. A disease syndrome is a useful construct, but that’s all it is—an aggregate of observations attached to a label, telling us what to see and how to deal with it” (225).
    “Introverted Intuition ... tells us that changing our frame of mind can change the world. For example, a recent article advises the parents of a fussy or demanding baby not to describe the fact as difficult but to recognize that such children have vivid, strong, and rich personalities. This is how Introverted Intuition works. The material facts remain the same, but we organize them in a new conceptual pattern that changes their meaning and gives us new options for behavior” (224).
    SO an ENTP is more of an inventor who bridges the gap between different sciences if we are just typing him to a high powered NE in science.
    You are right in the sense that yes, ENTPs are the most naturally inclined to try to bridge various phenomena together.

    But an entp in accoutning would reconcile GAAP, generally accepted accounting principles, to another framework like, international accounting principles.
    Hence NE + TI provides for a highly analytical mind that knows the differences and similarities between systems where as NI and TE provides for a highly analytical mind that provides for differences and similarities within a system.

    I'm off to see a movie with my pops...let me know what you think about my NE vs. NI thread - I think this is the best way to look at it because the framework is a great way to see how the two differ.
    I am only really inclined to think I agree somewhat with this part; I would drop the word "framework" though. It's misleading. It's better to speak about patterns or phenomena than frameworks, because frameworks are first of all logical constructs, not in themselves observable irrational facts e.g. I can observe the sun rise in the morning.

    I was waiting for the day you and I would meet.

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Youtuber | The Typologist Blog | Redditor | Message me!
    Likes LunaLuminosity liked this post

  6. #6
    The Green Jolly Robin H.
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Posts
    1,683

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Entropic View Post
    This doesn't sound like Ne as much as it sounds like Ji, but particularly, Ti. Ne is more about making connections between unrelated phenomena:





    As soon we begin to talk about systems such as frameworks, we end up in the realms of judgement because intuition is irrational, that is, it takes in information and perceives connections in the world as they are. There is no underlying logic or foundation to what is discerned, as much as it is taking in information and observe the world in and of itself, and because it is intuition, understanding intangible connections between that which is physically observable. Judgement, on the other hand, wishes to place things observed into a logical framework in order to make our observations make sense, and in the case of the rational dominant i.e. someone who leads with Ji/Je as their dominant function, they will also apply already known formulae, standards and laws onto the world and wish to shape the world to make it fit the frameworks they've already pre-defined. This is why Jung speaks of the rational type as striving towards a utopian ideal, because the rational type wants the world to live up to certain norms or standards that are, from the perspective of irrationality that is, observing the world as it is without having any pre-conceived notions of how it should be like.



    Sounds like pure Ji, but mostly Ti. Ni isn't so concerned about frameworks because Ni is an irrational function and it gathers information from the collective unconsciousness. It recognizes archetypal patterns in the world. Improving a framework that is, improving logical understanding, refining an idea of how the world should be, that is the realm of rationality. Of seeking to make sense of something. Ni perceives, it understands through various connections that it can observe, but it does not in itself, seek to improve.



    No. Anyone can learn multiple frameworks.





    Seeing how two different unrelated phenomena got something in common and what connects them is Ne. What you described here with these two paragraphs, is just an example of your own Ne-dominant bias which has nothing to do with Ni in itself. Of course Ni types can deal with multiple frameworks. Any body of science deals with multiple frameworks within that science, no matter how specialized you are. Ni isn't per se specialization either.







    You are right in the sense that yes, ENTPs are the most naturally inclined to try to bridge various phenomena together.





    I am only really inclined to think I agree somewhat with this part; I would drop the word "framework" though. It's misleading. It's better to speak about patterns or phenomena than frameworks, because frameworks are first of all logical constructs, not in themselves observable irrational facts e.g. I can observe the sun rise in the morning.
    The idea that NE is bridging multiple frameworks together isn't my own idea...it is from an mbti web site...lol.

    And my dominant function is TE or NI...I type as ENTJ/INTJ more than ENTP.

    A framework is an archtype in itself and is probably used losely in the sense of just a way of integrating things. So you can have two frameworks and a third framework for integrating them.

    NI does not reach into the collective per se...that is more SI...which Jung noted was more deeper than NI.

    NI is the image making function according to Jung. So if you imagine a mountain, a framework, and then things on the mountain, like bushes and rocks, elements of the framework, you are using NI.

    But if you imagine a mountain, a framework, and then it reminds you of an ocean, another framework, and then you compare the coral reef to the flora, then you are using NE. Both are image making functions.

    Let's not forget that a framework is an archetype too. A net, for example, is a construct that appears in taxes, the galaxy, in nature, and in electronics, so is a spiral, and a proration.
    "i shut the door and in the morning
    it was open
    -the end"




    Olemn slammed his hammer and from the sparks on the metal of his anvil came the spheres of the heavens.

    Sayrah blew life into the spheres and they moved. From her wheel she weaved the names of people in to mystery.

  7. #7
    The Green Jolly Robin H.
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Posts
    1,683

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Entropic View Post
    This doesn't sound like Ne as much as it sounds like Ji, but particularly, Ti. Ne is more about making connections between unrelated phenomena:





    As soon we begin to talk about systems such as frameworks, we end up in the realms of judgement because intuition is irrational, that is, it takes in information and perceives connections in the world as they are. There is no underlying logic or foundation to what is discerned, as much as it is taking in information and observe the world in and of itself, and because it is intuition, understanding intangible connections between that which is physically observable. Judgement, on the other hand, wishes to place things observed into a logical framework in order to make our observations make sense, and in the case of the rational dominant i.e. someone who leads with Ji/Je as their dominant function, they will also apply already known formulae, standards and laws onto the world and wish to shape the world to make it fit the frameworks they've already pre-defined. This is why Jung speaks of the rational type as striving towards a utopian ideal, because the rational type wants the world to live up to certain norms or standards that are, from the perspective of irrationality that is, observing the world as it is without having any pre-conceived notions of how it should be like.



    Sounds like pure Ji, but mostly Ti. Ni isn't so concerned about frameworks because Ni is an irrational function and it gathers information from the collective unconsciousness. It recognizes archetypal patterns in the world. Improving a framework that is, improving logical understanding, refining an idea of how the world should be, that is the realm of rationality. Of seeking to make sense of something. Ni perceives, it understands through various connections that it can observe, but it does not in itself, seek to improve.



    No. Anyone can learn multiple frameworks.





    Seeing how two different unrelated phenomena got something in common and what connects them is Ne. What you described here with these two paragraphs, is just an example of your own Ne-dominant bias which has nothing to do with Ni in itself. Of course Ni types can deal with multiple frameworks. Any body of science deals with multiple frameworks within that science, no matter how specialized you are. Ni isn't per se specialization either.







    You are right in the sense that yes, ENTPs are the most naturally inclined to try to bridge various phenomena together.





    I am only really inclined to think I agree somewhat with this part; I would drop the word "framework" though. It's misleading. It's better to speak about patterns or phenomena than frameworks, because frameworks are first of all logical constructs, not in themselves observable irrational facts e.g. I can observe the sun rise in the morning.
    here you go...taken from personalityjunky.com

    "INTJs and INFJs, by contrast, tend to be more comfortable with working with static concepts and conceptual frameworks. In doing so, INJs are not intentionally closing off their minds. Rather, as we’ve seen, Introverted Intuition, by its very nature, seems to be more convergent and dare I say, analytical, then Ne. One might even suggest, as Lenore Thomson has, that Ni has a stronger left-brained character than Ne does. Hence, INJs are generally more comfortable working with deduction, concepts, and static/”eternal” ideas. Both Plato and Jung are classic examples."

    This alludes to the point I made above, still entirely valid and the one I hold,...INTJ's vs. INTP....one tends to work within one framework and the other one tends to span a gamut between multiple frameworks as a product of resisting the urge to adopt a single one - which means they tend to move from one framework to another since they are always fluidly building their own internal framework.
    "i shut the door and in the morning
    it was open
    -the end"




    Olemn slammed his hammer and from the sparks on the metal of his anvil came the spheres of the heavens.

    Sayrah blew life into the spheres and they moved. From her wheel she weaved the names of people in to mystery.
    Likes labyrinthine liked this post

  8. #8
    The Green Jolly Robin H.
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Posts
    1,683

    Default

    NI and NE will always function according to a framework because no function in itself works without the other 8.

    You cannot have NE or NI if you do not have TE and TI and the other functions. Whenever we consider one function we must always consider the others for you cannot define one without knowing the other...they are complimentary.

    NE relies on TI to make subtle distinctions between frameworks to build a third subjective framework and NI relies on TE to inform it upon subtle distinctions within one framework based on empirical evidence.

    NI is used in improving a system
    and NE is used in building a new system.

    NE is used in brainstorming many solutions
    and NI is used in brainstorming a way to implement one solution.

    Speaking generically, and archetypally, an ENTP scientist would come up with seven solutions for a problem, and the INTJ would implement or determine the the best one according to certain constraints..


    A framework in itself is not a product of ONE function. It is a thing that exists outside of cognitive processing both as a subjective construct and objective construct. The use and adoption of a framework does not require any thought, feeling, sensing, intuition beyond what a normal human would produce since we all adopt frameworks when we are born and learn to meld with society.

    Frameworks are everywhere and in everything and we behave according to frameworks all the time even unconsciously...so it is not a matter of NE and NI involving frameworks but a matter of that frameworks are the penultimate of our existence and therefore a good pivot point for describing how we process information.

    Even posting on this message board shows the adoption of a framework.

    We could easily substitute the word framework for system, or simply say "method" or "methodology" AGain not a rational thing per se...an artist has a framework based on his intuitions or he just goes according to his gut...

    frameworks are not always logical or rational.
    "i shut the door and in the morning
    it was open
    -the end"




    Olemn slammed his hammer and from the sparks on the metal of his anvil came the spheres of the heavens.

    Sayrah blew life into the spheres and they moved. From her wheel she weaved the names of people in to mystery.

  9. #9
    Senior Member Entropic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    8w9 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILI Ni
    Posts
    1,199

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GarrotTheThief View Post
    The idea that NE is bridging multiple frameworks together isn't my own idea...it is from an mbti web site...lol.
    So? You made the claim, then it is up to you to defend it.

    And my dominant function is TE or NI...I type as ENTJ/INTJ more than ENTP.
    The way you seem to think and write doesn't necessarily imply it, either way.

    A framework is an archtype in itself and is probably used losely in the sense of just a way of integrating things. So you can have two frameworks and a third framework for integrating them.
    Reread what I wrote on my thoughts on the word "framework."

    NI does not reach into the collective per se...that is more SI...which Jung noted was more deeper than NI.
    This is absolutely incorrect for several reasons. First of all, all of the introverted functions deal with the archetype world, however, only Ni has the most direct link to the collective unconsciousness because it is a) intuition, meaning it deals with content generated by the unconsciousness and b) is introverted, so it deals with the archetype world.

    Quote Originally Posted by Carl Jung, Psychological Types
    Intuition, in the introverted attitude, is directed upon the inner object, a term we might justly apply to the elements of the unconscious. For the relation of inner objects to consciousness is entirely analogous to that of outer objects, although theirs is a psychological and not a physical reality. Inner objects appear to the intuitive perception as subjective images of things, which, though not met with in external experience, really determine the contents of the unconscious, i.e. the collective unconscious, in the last resort. Naturally, in their per se character, these contents are, not accessible to experience, a quality which they have in common with the outer object. For just as outer objects correspond only relatively with our perceptions of them, so the phenomenal forms of the inner object are also relative; products of their (to us) inaccessible essence and of the peculiar nature of the intuitive function. Like sensation, intuition also has its subjective factor, which is suppressed to the farthest limit in the extraverted intuition, but which becomes the decisive factor in the intuition of the introvert. Although this intuition may receive its impetus from outer objects, it is never arrested by the external possibilities, but stays with that factor which the outer object releases within.

    Whereas introverted sensation is mainly confined to the perception of particular innervation phenomena by way of the unconscious, and does not go beyond them, intuition represses this side of the subjective factor and perceives the image which has really occasioned the innervation.
    Here Jung claims that a) intuition but particularly introverted intuition (Ni), deals with unconscious content and that this unconscious content is primarily generated by being attuned to the collective unconsciousness. In addition to this, while introverted sensation (Si) bears similarities to Ni, Si only deal with the physical innervations i.e. bodily sensations and does not abstract the meaning beyond the physical, Ni does. Hence, Ni is in a sense, deeper, than Si, in that Si still stays within the realms of sensation despite being a "deep" function due to its introverted nature.

    NI is the image making function according to Jung. So if you imagine a mountain, a framework, and then things on the mountain, like bushes and rocks, elements of the framework, you are using NI.
    Uhm... I get the impression you don't understand how Ni works. Ni is not the same as imagination and Jung referred to imagination as "phantasy" [sic] and is a phenomenon unrelated to the cognitive functions.

    But if you imagine a mountain, a framework, and then it reminds you of an ocean, another framework, and then you compare the coral reef to the flora, then you are using NE. Both are image making functions.
    Comparison in itself? No. Depends on what aspects you are comparing.

    Let's not forget that a framework is an archetype too. A net, for example, is a construct that appears in taxes, the galaxy, in nature, and in electronics, so is a spiral, and a proration.
    I still insist using the word "framework" is fallacious because it brings forth the wrong impression of what perception really is about and is a poor choice of words.

    Quote Originally Posted by GarrotTheThief View Post
    here you go...taken from personalityjunky.com

    "INTJs and INFJs, by contrast, tend to be more comfortable with working with static concepts and conceptual frameworks. In doing so, INJs are not intentionally closing off their minds. Rather, as we’ve seen, Introverted Intuition, by its very nature, seems to be more convergent and dare I say, analytical, then Ne. One might even suggest, as Lenore Thomson has, that Ni has a stronger left-brained character than Ne does. Hence, INJs are generally more comfortable working with deduction, concepts, and static/”eternal” ideas. Both Plato and Jung are classic examples."

    This alludes to the point I made above, still entirely valid and the one I hold,...INTJ's vs. INTP....one tends to work within one framework and the other one tends to span a gamut between multiple frameworks as a product of resisting the urge to adopt a single one - which means they tend to move from one framework to another since they are always fluidly building their own internal framework.
    Yeah, so you found a shit description on a shit online site that is making weird and vague allusions to an MBTI theorist without actually explaining what the MBTI theorist is trying to suggest and waters it down to the point it becomes extremely removed from the original source. Lenore Thomson does not allude to "frameworks" but she clearly uses the term "pattern" or alternatively, "perspective", because again, "framework" is a word that is highly misleading. I would therefore encourage you to stop using it; it doesn't capture the point. Similarly, if you are going to discuss "images" that intuition deals with, it is better to actually do so by describing what Jung meant with them i.e. the woman who described as having a snake in her stomach or the man who described vertigo as being shot by an arrow. Just imagining a mountain is not an image that Ni deals with; Ni imagery is primarily subjectively recited and generated as a reaction to external stimulus e.g. when I feel sad, I may describe it as having a hole in my chest. That is Ni imagery.

    I was waiting for the day you and I would meet.

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Youtuber | The Typologist Blog | Redditor | Message me!

  10. #10
    The Green Jolly Robin H.
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Posts
    1,683

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Entropic View Post
    So? You made the claim, then it is up to you to defend it.



    The way you seem to think and write doesn't necessarily imply it, either way.



    Reread what I wrote on my thoughts on the word "framework."



    This is absolutely incorrect for several reasons. First of all, all of the introverted functions deal with the archetype world, however, only Ni has the most direct link to the collective unconsciousness because it is a) intuition, meaning it deals with content generated by the unconsciousness and b) is introverted, so it deals with the archetype world.



    Here Jung claims that a) intuition but particularly introverted intuition (Ni), deals with unconscious content and that this unconscious content is primarily generated by being attuned to the collective unconsciousness. In addition to this, while introverted sensation (Si) bears similarities to Ni, Si only deal with the physical innervations i.e. bodily sensations and does not abstract the meaning beyond the physical, Ni does. Hence, Ni is in a sense, deeper, than Si, in that Si still stays within the realms of sensation despite being a "deep" function due to its introverted nature.



    Uhm... I get the impression you don't understand how Ni works. Ni is not the same as imagination and Jung referred to imagination as "phantasy" [sic] and is a phenomenon unrelated to the cognitive functions.



    Comparison in itself? No. Depends on what aspects you are comparing.



    I still insist using the word "framework" is fallacious because it brings forth the wrong impression of what perception really is about and is a poor choice of words.



    Yeah, so you found a shit description on a shit online site that is making weird and vague allusions to an MBTI theorist without actually explaining what the MBTI theorist is trying to suggest and waters it down to the point it becomes extremely removed from the original source. Lenore Thomson does not allude to "frameworks" but she clearly uses the term "pattern" or alternatively, "perspective", because again, "framework" is a word that is highly misleading. I would therefore encourage you to stop using it; it doesn't capture the point. Similarly, if you are going to discuss "images" that intuition deals with, it is better to actually do so by describing what Jung meant with them i.e. the woman who described as having a snake in her stomach or the man who described vertigo as being shot by an arrow. Just imagining a mountain is not an image that Ni deals with; Ni imagery is primarily subjectively recited and generated as a reaction to external stimulus e.g. when I feel sad, I may describe it as having a hole in my chest. That is Ni imagery.

    We can always agree to disagree. I still don't think you have made a valid point regarding framework. As for quoting Jung, have you found the quote where intuition in comparison to introverted sensing is limited in reaching the unconscious? It's in his book Modern man in search of his soul.

    Either way, that is not the only site that uses the framework example. I think your missing the point here and splitting hairs...

    But as I said...we can happily agree to disagree so no big deal.
    "i shut the door and in the morning
    it was open
    -the end"




    Olemn slammed his hammer and from the sparks on the metal of his anvil came the spheres of the heavens.

    Sayrah blew life into the spheres and they moved. From her wheel she weaved the names of people in to mystery.

Similar Threads

  1. Here we go again.
    By Caligula in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-19-2011, 10:42 AM
  2. Replies: 15
    Last Post: 05-07-2009, 09:55 AM
  3. Here We Go Again INTJs, I Need Your Advice on MBTI
    By WithoutaFace in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 02-07-2009, 12:56 AM
  4. Ne vs. Ni
    By Blackwater in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 11-20-2007, 01:05 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO