User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 21 to 30 of 35

Thread: I just know.

  1. #21
    4x9 cascadeco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Enneagram
    4 so/sp
    Posts
    6,931

    Default

    I think that it is learning to try to step back and really critique, internally, WHY you think or feel something. What led you to think that, or feel that? It can be diffficult to get to the root, and on the downside, it can result in some serious over-analysis, and becoming highly confused as a result, so it's definitely a balance that can be hard to maintain at times, but I think it is really learning to critically assess the WHY. Because, as fidelia indicated, there is pretty much always a reason - it just may not be readily apparent. Also, it may be, in the end, still nearly impossible to articulate, because I think that many times our WHY is a result of a million separate threads, seemingly unconnected, but when you take them all in their entirety, they all point to this single answer.

    [Separate topic, but there's also the possibility too that even though all of the threads point to this single answer, on our end there's always the possibility we're missing a thread or we're connecting the wrong ones -- i.e. it's possible we could take another set of threads and come up with a different answer. Off-topic, but this is a reason I think Ni-doms can seemingly suddenly shift perspectives... it's because they 'suddenly' are taking into account a new set of threads, thus resulting in a new Result, if that makes sense]

    Specifically, with a concrete example, say you get a bad vibe from someone. You just meet them, and you 'know' they're a certain type of person. Well, ultimately there's a reason you think that, if you really dig into it. For example, if you analyze, you might realize that it's their mannerisms, or it's a specific thing they said that wasn't in alignment with some other aspect of their presentation/what they're saying, or they might drive a bmw and so you 'know' they place value in status/image on some level, and when you tie that in with the way they raise their eyebrow when they say something, you know that there's a very high probability that they're also likely to be X, Y, and Z, and therefore do AA with their life.... and so on. That's the idea. There's reasons you think something, it's just that over the years it's second-nature, or all of these interconnections happen simultaneously, mostly, in your head, that you don't think to break it down (or most of the time it would take too long to do so or is pointless/counterproductive).
    "...On and on and on and on he strode, far out over the sands, singing wildly to the sea, crying to greet the advent of the life that had cried to him." - James Joyce

    My Photography and Watercolor Fine Art Prints!!! Cascade Colors Fine Art Prints
    https://docs.google.com/uc?export=do...Gd5N3NZZE52QjQ

  2. #22
    garbage
    Guest

    Default

    Can you work backward?

  3. #23
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    MBTI
    ESTP
    Enneagram
    8w7
    Posts
    2,319

    Default

    In the case of INFP's they usually don't.

  4. #24
    Honor Thy Inferior Such Irony's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    INtp
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/so
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    5,091

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OrangeAppled View Post
    This is more of a Ne-aux take on it, but perhaps helpful still...

    I sometimes have the problem of "just knowing" a current, but "hidden" reality & being unable to support it with anything concrete. Because I see something happening that's not obvious to others, I can guess the next step in the pattern.
    I think it's a bunch of semi-unconsciously perceived stuff being fit together in the background of my head until at once I get a whole realization. This happens for me concerning people's motives a lot. I don't consciously note body language or analyze a comment they make, etc. But one day, one small thing can trigger all this seemingly unrelated stuff to come together & give me an overview of "what's really going on".

    I've gotten better at straining my brain to recall details to support my conclusion. I'll chalk this up to better Si with age. But once I do that, the details can fade out again. You know that movie Eternal Sunshine? I think Jim Carry's character is Si-dom. My mind is kind of like his as the memories are being erased, and then he's just left with this hunch that something is/was/could be. It's more like I have the hunch, then as I try to bring back the details, they sort of erase out after confirming my hunch. I'll sometimes be left with a few of the strongest details which support my hunch, which I then probably remember in an exaggerated manner. Again, I think this is an inferior use of Si.

    Sometimes, I try and write stuff down as I recall it. This sounds like paranoia, now, as I type it... Let me assure you I don't record daily details in case I need to prove something later. I mean, in retrospect, I may journal some thoughts on why I feel a certain way, and whatever details I manage to pull up from memory or some other source will be listed & sorted there. On some occasions, this has actually tempered my view as once "facts" are listed & sorted, my hunches & feelings may seem less valid. I sometimes can't see the trees for the forest, then, and this can ground me so I'm better able to realize the trees are bushes & it's not a forest after all, but a thicket.

    Because I am able to recall details, even if with difficulty, I've realized stuff DOES strike me in the moment, but unlike a Si type, I often don't seek to immediately connect details to anything & slowly build impressions. Instead it just kind of gets tossed into a murky pot where hunches brew, and later on, you don't know exactly went into the sauce. Dissecting it is like guessing the ingredients by final product when you have no recipe.

    Sometimes I talk to another person, which in the case of Ne, helps me plot my own jumping between all those contexts so I can see how I connected the details, but consciously this time. I kind of relive my original realization in bringing the other person to the same one. It helps if they've experienced many of the concrete details I did, because then they support my foggy memory & I know I'm not paranoid.

    I've had a lot of useful conversations with my ISFJ mom about stuff like this. Sometimes I get told I'm paranoid, sometimes I'm vindicated later as supporting details or even my full conclusion finally emerge as visible to others, and other times I successfully get people connect it all as I do and become aware of a reality I see.

    It's also not unusual for someone else's observation to provide the "trigger" that causes me to finally realize a big picture. I think this is because their perception of something concrete is a needed support to the hunch that's been shaping up somewhere in my head, because I can push hunches down/dismiss them since I struggle to support them factually.

    So carrying around a Sensor buddy in your pocket might help. Give them a notepad, and take some mental pictures yourself.
    Interesting. I can particularly relate to the bolded parts. I'm an NT but I still find it stressful to have to justify my conclusions to other people. I think it may have to do with the auxilary Ne you talk about. Also, my dominant Ti has it's own system of logic- one that may not be so easily comprehensible to other people.
    INtp
    5w6 or 9w1 sp/so/sx, I think
    Ravenclaw/Hufflepuff
    Neutral Good
    LII-Ne




  5. #25
    Senior Member hazelsees's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Posts
    133

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cascadeco View Post
    I think that it is learning to try to step back and really critique, internally, WHY you think or feel something. What led you to think that, or feel that? It can be diffficult to get to the root, and on the downside, it can result in some serious over-analysis, and becoming highly confused as a result, so it's definitely a balance that can be hard to maintain at times, but I think it is really learning to critically assess the WHY. Because, as fidelia indicated, there is pretty much always a reason - it just may not be readily apparent. Also, it may be, in the end, still nearly impossible to articulate, because I think that many times our WHY is a result of a million separate threads, seemingly unconnected, but when you take them all in their entirety, they all point to this single answer.

    [Separate topic, but there's also the possibility too that even though all of the threads point to this single answer, on our end there's always the possibility we're missing a thread or we're connecting the wrong ones -- i.e. it's possible we could take another set of threads and come up with a different answer. Off-topic, but this is a reason I think Ni-doms can seemingly suddenly shift perspectives... it's because they 'suddenly' are taking into account a new set of threads, thus resulting in a new Result, if that makes sense]

    Specifically, with a concrete example, say you get a bad vibe from someone. You just meet them, and you 'know' they're a certain type of person. Well, ultimately there's a reason you think that, if you really dig into it. For example, if you analyze, you might realize that it's their mannerisms, or it's a specific thing they said that wasn't in alignment with some other aspect of their presentation/what they're saying, or they might drive a bmw and so you 'know' they place value in status/image on some level, and when you tie that in with the way they raise their eyebrow when they say something, you know that there's a very high probability that they're also likely to be X, Y, and Z, and therefore do AA with their life.... and so on. That's the idea. There's reasons you think something, it's just that over the years it's second-nature, or all of these interconnections happen simultaneously, mostly, in your head, that you don't think to break it down (or most of the time it would take too long to do so or is pointless/counterproductive).
    This is good! It gives me a lot to think about. Thank you!

  6. #26
    Senior Member hazelsees's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Posts
    133

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bologna View Post
    Can you work backward?
    Interesting. Usually when I'm playing certain games, working some types of puzzles, or even take tests--I start at the end. Hmmm....

  7. #27
    Senior Member hazelsees's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Posts
    133

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DJ Arendee View Post
    In the case of INFP's they usually don't.
    What? "Just know" or work backwards?

  8. #28
    Sugar Hiccup OrangeAppled's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/sx
    Socionics
    IEI Ni
    Posts
    7,661

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marmotini View Post
    I know numerous, numerous women, especially, who just get bad feelings about people, based on body language, tone inflection, eye contact, any number of things; this may be connected to our sharper attention to body language, due to child care. I remember having to watch a film in high school about how women have sharper reads on people's facial expressions and feelings due to the need to interpret the needs of babies and small children.
    Exactly....and that's the difference. It's based on something "concrete". They have physical evidence to refer to as a basis, so it's not "just knowing". Rather, there's a perceiving of facts, and then a judgment of what they mean.

    It's a downside of iNtuition to arrive at a whole perception without knowing what exactly led there in a "real" way, mainly when you have to explain yourself to someone else. Growing up in an SF household, I got a lot of flack for this. I was cut off mid-sentence if I launched any hypothesis on why something is what. It's not their fault. It just wasn't "real" to them.

    Of course Ns still use Sensing, which is why I can strain my mind and recall some details. I do this better in an introverted manner (Si), where I reflect or write, and memory triggers help. It used to be worse. I'd have a feeling and have some intuitive ideas which supported this, a sort of theory which validated my feeling, but no one else found it valid because they wanted facts, experience & logic to back it up. A metaphor was not going to cut it. For me, I'd see something external, say a tree, and it would explain to me how something else was/is/would be, even if that had nothing to do with a tree. So then I knew how a person, situation, whatever worked and I could extrapolate the unknown from that. But sometimes, I didn't even make a connection with the trigger. I had the idea & it rang true and what I was doing at the moment seemed so unrelated. I thought I was doing good when I started making use of metaphor.

    Se sister: How do you know that?
    Me: Because people are like trees, and so...
    Se sister: No, people aren't trees! That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard! How could people be trees? They are entirely different. I know what I'm talking about!
    Me: Okay, but just imagine that people are like trees...
    Se sister: NOOO! That's not REAL! That's pointless & irrelevant.
    Me: But if...
    Se sister: NO "IF"! Something either is or it isn't.
    Me: Okay fine. Nevermind.

    Later...

    Se sister: Why do you say that will happen?
    Me: Because if a person...
    Se sister: What person?
    Me: No person...I'm just saying if someone in general...
    Se sister: That's not REAL then! How can you say that if it hasn't happened? You just make stuff up. It means nothing.

    Then it happens..

    Me: I told you!!!!!
    Se sister: What are you talking about. I don't remember that.
    Me: The other day...
    Se sister: No, you were talking about trees. That's not the same thing.
    Me: Okay, but if trees are like people in the sense that...
    Se sister: NO. Stop it! Trees are not like people.
    Me: But didn't you see what happened? I was right! I also told you that if a person...
    Se sister: No. This is totally different. You said nothing about this. I don't know who these imaginary people are, but this & that have nothing to do with each other.

    Instead, I had to work out WHY these things were related, instead of just knowing. For me, a Si library really helped. I could begin using more illustration over metaphor, something more acceptable to my Ni-phobe sister.

    THIS IS NOT THE SAME THING AS BEING AN MBTI N!!!

    However, if you "just know" entire theories about something, that probably is an NF matter.
    Yes, it's not the same as being an N. As you mention "women's intuition" is more of a Feeling thing because it's really an evaluation based off a grasp of how people work. The sensing feeler will rely on the stuff you mentioned as signals, and those perceptions have no meaning on their own (neither do intuitions; they're just "seeing" also, not interpreting).

    Anyhow, a lot of laymen's terms mean something very different from Jungian terms. A lot of stuff associated with Feeling in laymen's terms might be called Sensing in Jungian terms. And of course, it's all thinking, not just Thinking.

    For me, I don't form quick impressions of people, and I think this is both lack of Je & SeNi. I'm not surprised that types which prefer these are quicker to sum up based on first impressions. Perhaps, this is where the INFP rep for giving the benefit of the doubt or being naive comes in. I just don't pick up on "concrete" signals from people, and I don't get whole immediate perceptions like a Ni type.

    Instead I have many ideas, which grow as I have more exposure & more contexts to explore them in, and then in one moment, something kind of merges them, and a whole pattern or theory results, but I don't consciously arrange it. It just occurs as a whole, as if my mind put a puzzle together in the background. And this is led by Fi as far as what it means & what its worth. Fi is the interpreter or classifier, and it rules the conclusion, but I'm much more confident in that. What I question is if the pattern/theory exists.

    So anyway, what I end up with can be a deeper understanding of the whole psychology of a person across contexts, rather than a vibe about what they may specifically do/want in a moment. But it's still something of a hunch, because I don't easily pull up the factual support. So when I "read them", it's more like "a possible & likely next step in a pattern". If I were not Te inferior, perhaps I'd consider the next logical step, but for understanding people (largely emotional) I think Fi is better anyway. I don't bother connecting the bits logically, and some of my failure to explain it lies there. Ne makes a lot of leaps, and whatever Si details there are more like little dots which give a vague indication of its formation, not a clear line. This is why I always hesitate to offer my own hunches as a judgement, even though I'm right a lot of the time. I tend to offer them as ideas, interpretations, possibilites etc.


    Quote Originally Posted by hazelsees View Post
    This is interesting! I've read it 3 times and new stuff comes out each time.
    How did you learn to get better at straining your brain?
    Practice I guess? If we're talking development, then it's probably just my tertiary Si being more reliable, instead of murky and distorted. I mentioned writing as being a help. It's kind of like when you lose your keys, and you backtrack your steps, you may still not recall the moment where you last set them down, but you've narrowed the possibilities for where they could be, so that you have a clearer idea of what likely happened. For me, this is FiSi narrowing down & making sense of Ne possibility.

    I think someone mentioned "working backwards". That's something I do with Fi anyways. I kind of have a whole conclusion and then work backwards to reason it out. I suppose you could call that rationalizing, but if I cannot find good reason, then my feeling can & will change. I basically reinterpret it. Maybe I'm just sorting how to apply a feeling then...sometimes I think that's it. It's just finding the right context for it, so that it makes sense.

    With Ne, it's my experience of reality, but focused on the invisible under-workings of it, so that reality is always sort of a concept or theory. I used to say I doubted my own "feelings" & had to learn to trust them. I realize now, those were not feelings, not in a Jungian sense. My feelings were just me - I never mistrusted my idea of what was significant, meaningful, etc. I was resisting my E function, Ne, thinking the connections I saw were perhaps delusions, and I so I didn't even know how to judge them. I was fully aware of how unreliable my Si was; it was all exaggeration and black-outs. But with Ne, I knew what was going on & what that meant for the future. I just got invalidated a lot and had to regain confidence & learn how to better articulate myself. I feel less blind-sided by life this way, because reality could be very confusing for me before. Using my personal theories & concepts helps me navigate a lot better.

    You seem to be referring to Ni though, which is different of course, and why I've noted I'm coming from the Ne standpoint.
    Often a star was waiting for you to notice it. A wave rolled toward you out of the distant past, or as you walked under an open window, a violin yielded itself to your hearing. All this was mission. But could you accomplish it? (Rilke)

    INFP | 4w5 sp/sx | RLUEI - Primary Inquisitive | Tritype is tripe

  9. #29
    can't handcuff the wind Z Buck McFate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    3,683

    Default

    The biggest problem I have with ‘just knowing’ and not being able to immediately articulate ‘why’ is that- unfortunately- it’s importance is often directly commensurate with how emotionally charged the gut feeling is, and the more emotionally charged it is the harder it is to put into words. So, the more I ‘just know’ it- without having any kind of language ready-at-hand to communicate ‘why’- the harder it is to explain.

    In the past I tended to focus on keeping my composure until I could get away and reflect on why something bothered me. I’d try to assess the extent to which my hunch really made a difference, and put thought into how to articulate it according to how urgent it felt. Somewhere between feeling emotionally charged about it and figuring it out only partway, I’d lose interest…..and the problem with that is when it came up again I’d feel progressively more emotionally charged (and even less able to articulate). It’s really hard to keep thinking about those kinds of things once the affective pull wears off, though.
    Reality is a collective hunch. -Lily Tomlin

    5w4 sx/sp Johari / Nohari

  10. #30
    A_priori
    Guest

    Default

    Just for the record I have met a few claimed NI/NE doms who think they're super intuitive and quite often ive come to see that thses claimed intuitive preceptions are nothing more than crackpot theory. This being said I do believe that some people look further than others but to really try to put this thing we refer to as intuition into words is at best a paradox. I'm starting to think that either there isn't much weight to the whole S vs N perception function or there are quite a few people out there who are full of grandeur. I think that the reason some people claim to be more intuitive than others is mainly idicitive of to how visual that person is, how often they turn to there feelings over ration and of course collective experience, cognitive or not.

    It would be intresting to see more studies done on a clinical level to do with a persons ability to utilize this so called unconscious function. I just think that there are far to many people on here who think they are intuitive because they take a quick online test, and then start connecting all kinds of dots ect.. I especially love it when people try and explain the unconscious mind. Even though I find it amusing I always question the authonticity. It's in my nature I guess, perhaps this has something to do with my experience and an education routed in psych. This said, I do believe in intuition to a degree. If I didn't I wouldn't have Jung books scatterd all over my place. I just don't think it derives exactly as the MBTI suggests.

Similar Threads

  1. [MBTItm] When you just know...
    By bronson in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 01-10-2011, 07:05 AM
  2. [NF] Do you ever just 'know' how things are going to pan out?
    By Lissa in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 10-03-2009, 08:23 PM
  3. Gosh, I don't know what to say... it's just like real life
    By Lisa73 in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 07-16-2008, 11:34 AM

Posting Permissions

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