• 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.

[MBTI General] Do N and T really go together?

Athenian200

Protocol Droid
Joined
Jul 1, 2007
Messages
8,828
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
4w5
I've actually been wondering for a while now. It seems like ST and NF make sense, but NT and SF don't.

An ST uses specific, sensed details, and reasons in a linear, impersonal fashion. Basically, the calculator/bean-counter type. I can see those two going together well.

An NF uses their imagination and instinct to get an idea of the "essence" of things, and then weighs this according to their subjective sense of value. These two also go well together.

An NT also uses their imagination and instinct to get an idea of the "essence" of things, and then... reasons in a linear, impersonal fashion?

Intuition is a highly unconscious, somewhat subjective process. It relies on a kind of vague instinct, a subjective perception that can't be expressed literally. So why, then, would you go ahead and stuff all of that into a simplistic, impersonal box that's better suited to simple details? You're perceiving reality subjectively, and then trying to turn around and throw away all of the instinct and irrational process that gave rise to the idea in the first place, to clean it up and push it through a simplistic, linear, impersonal process that can't possibly capture much of what was perceived.

It's almost like it turns against itself halfway through the process in a half-hearted effort to make an appeal that will be listened to by "bean-counter" types.

So, what is an NT, really? Is it an Intuitive that was forced to discipline their imagination into working with logic? Is it a conflicted person who tried to set up a strange compromise between the rational and irrational parts of their mind? Is it someone who wants to hide/destroy their own sensitivity for some reason?

I know that if you're an NT, you might very well understand how it is they go together, and may even think that N and F don't go well together. I'm just curious as to why those processes should work together, and how they fit together for you.
 

Kalach

Filthy Apes!
Joined
Dec 3, 2008
Messages
4,310
MBTI Type
INTJ
So, what is an NT, really? Is it an Intuitive that was forced to discipline their imagination into working with logic? Is it a conflicted person who tried to set up a strange compromise between the rational and irrational parts of their mind?

If it was, then you would be too. You got a non-rational Ni and a rational Fe in that same conflict, in'tcha?

Is it someone who wants to hide/destroy their own sensitivity for some reason?

N is sensitive? Its got feelings?


The various NTs work in different ways too. Some of them don't wear pants.

You may be responding less to a conflict between N and T and more to NTs having less overt feeling, and how could that possibly be unless they're broken?
 

MacGuffin

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
10,710
MBTI Type
xkcd
Enneagram
9w1
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Yeah, don't F-up the N function.
 

jenocyde

half mystic, half skeksis
Joined
Jan 2, 2009
Messages
6,387
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w8
IME, N sees the big picture, while S sees (only??) what's exactly in front of you. Often with my S friends, they are amazed that I can predict in my head how a moment will affect us in a split second. It's not instinct, it's foresight based on previous pieces of knowledge that often don't appear to be related. Imagination doesn't come from the air, it comes from keeping record of things past. It doesn't feel subjective to me, it's rather objective. It's like 2 different ways of learning - one is by memorization, the other is by considering the context. Both are effective, but very different.

This will seem like a silly example, but this actually happened yesterday. An S friend went to a Kabbalist who didn't ask him any questions but directed him to open a holy book and pick a random phrase. Based on that, he was told to do a certain action at 4 certain times. He mentioned to me how he didn't believe the guy knew what he was talking about and it was all a hoax (which I can neither support or deny). He said he wasn't sure why these times were chosen, but he would just do as instructed.

But when he told me all 4 times, it all made sense to me in the blink of an eye. I am not Jewish and have not studied Kabbalah, but I've read about it here and there. As soon as I saw the random times, I saw a pattern. All the numbers added up to 18, which is a spiritual (chai) number in the ancient Jewish tradition (gematria). The fact that he was supposed to do this action on a Tuesday added to symbolism. So I was able to tell him why the numbers were not arbitrary for his specific situation (which I further broke down to reveal that his entire "situation" existed in multiples of 18 - the dates of occurrence, the letters in the names of the principal players, etc...) which is extraordinarily lucky. To him this seemed like I was psychic, to me it was just completely obvious and I couldn't see how he had missed the significance.

Life, through my eyes, looks like a huge jigsaw puzzle that is just one color and I spend most of my days trying to figure out how all the pieces fit together. (maybe to an S the puzzle is color coded in a linear fashion?? idk...) When I am putting together something from Ikea or whatever, I cannot (cannot!!) follow the step by step instructions. It's one of the most difficult things for me to do. I must look at the picture on the box and see for myself how all the parts work together, and then I can visualize in my mind what each piece does and why - based on that I know where it should go. Does that make more sense? I'm always looking for the big picture.
 

Athenian200

Protocol Droid
Joined
Jul 1, 2007
Messages
8,828
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
4w5
If it was, then you would be too. You got a non-rational Ni and a rational Fe in that same conflict, in'tcha?

I suppose so, depending how you consider Fe as a process.

N is sensitive? Its got feelings?

Well... no. Of course not. But it is more subjective than, say, sensing. I'm saying that the whole process of creativity, curiosity, imagination... there's something about it that seems to involve a certain kind of irrationality, a kind of passion/obsessiveness. Not the kind of sensitivity or passion you see in feelings. But it seems like NTs try to eliminate those elements and reduce the ideas entirely into simple, linear, impersonal logic.


The various NTs work in different ways too. Some of them don't wear pants.

Oh. Well, I don't care if they wear pants or not.
You may be responding less to a conflict between N and T and more to NTs having less overt feeling, and how could that possibly be unless they're broken?

Well, it's not about overt feeling. It's more about logic being limited to impersonal, linear, A-to-B kinds of processing. That seems like an incredible bind to put on Intuition, to me.
 

MacGuffin

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
10,710
MBTI Type
xkcd
Enneagram
9w1
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I'm not wearing pants!
 

Athenian200

Protocol Droid
Joined
Jul 1, 2007
Messages
8,828
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
4w5
Yeah, don't F-up the N function.

:thelook: I see what you did there. Very funny. :)

IME, N sees the big picture, while S sees (only??) what's exactly in front of you. Often with my S friends, they are amazed that I can predict in my head how a moment will affect us in a split second. It's not instinct, it's foresight based on previous pieces of knowledge that often don't appear to be related. Imagination doesn't come from the air, it comes from keeping record of things past. It doesn't feel subjective to me, it's rather objective. It's like 2 different ways of learning - one is by memorization, the other is by considering the context. Both are effective, but very different.

This will seem like a silly example, but this actually happened yesterday. An S friend went to a Kabbalist who didn't ask him any questions but directed him to open a holy book and pick a random phrase. Based on that, he was told to do a certain action at 4 certain times. He mentioned to me how he didn't believe the guy knew what he was talking about and it was all a hoax (which I can neither support or deny). He said he wasn't sure why these times were chosen, but he would just do as instructed.

But when he told me all 4 times, it all made sense to me in the blink of an eye. I am not Jewish and have not studied Kabbalah, but I've read about it here and there. As soon as I saw the random times, I saw a pattern. All the numbers added up to 18, which is a spiritual (chai) number in the ancient Jewish tradition (gematria). The fact that he was supposed to do this action on a Tuesday added to symbolism. So I was able to tell him why the numbers were not arbitrary for his specific situation (which I further broke down to reveal that his entire "situation" existed in multiples of 18 - the dates of occurrence, the letters in the names of the principal players, etc...) which is extraordinarily lucky. To him this seemed like I was psychic, to me it was just completely obvious and I couldn't see how he had missed the significance.

Life, through my eyes, looks like a huge jigsaw puzzle that is just one color and I spend most of my days trying to figure out how all the pieces fit together. (maybe to an S the puzzle is color coded in a linear fashion?? idk...) When I am putting together something from Ikea or whatever, I cannot (cannot!!) follow the step by step instructions. It's one of the most difficult things for me to do. I must look at the picture on the box and see for myself how all the parts work together, and then I can visualize in my mind what each piece does and why - based on that I know where it should go. Does that make more sense? I'm always looking for the big picture.

Actually, you're helping make my point. The things you're seeing involve perceiving a significance, which isn't something that's usually seen logically. Also, you admitted that you're obsessed with the big picture, that you're obsessed with seeing how things might go together, don't like just following steps or sticking to the obvious... you want to read something into things, and sometimes you'll go out of your way to do a task in a way that engages this process. Even if it's not the most logical way. So, there's a mild conflict between the linear tendencies of logic, and the more holistic perceptions of intuition.

I don't know, perhaps I'm just missing something.
 

entropie

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 24, 2008
Messages
16,767
MBTI Type
entp
Enneagram
783
There was once an image I found on the internet, where a matrix of 4x4 black round dots was presented in front of a white background. It said then: S sees the dots and N sees the relation between the dots.

Meaning a N sees a gearbox and then all the possibilities it can be used for to make money with it. Like cars, wind power stations or (two steps ahead in the future) a CVT gearbox, which allows for variable transmissions over a given curve of increasing rotations.

The S's on the other hand are more prone to notice change within things. Therefore they are better at managing a constant state. Meaning for example a N is more likely to not notice that he is becoming insane.

There are a lot more differences those two styles of perceptions show, when you start to watch people closely. Mainly its through the little things, the two styles of perceiving show themselves in the world.

If my dad as an ISTP for example sees a car, he associates all sort of practical applications with it. Like topspeed, max. load, hot design and good machining, while I see all the work that was put into it. I see the combustion engine and draw relations deep down till the level of thermodynamics, when the whole engine just becomes a geometric showable process, which is an abstract image of reality and if shown to someone outstanding, not graspable at first, if you dont explain, what it was derived from.

Thats why I had to think twice, the day the guy asked me what colour my car is, after I explained him for 1 hour all the technical specialities it's got and how they work.

Furthermore I think N mustnt be a subjective process. Its of course my relations I draw between logically connectable things, but I think Ne is more practically oriented towards the real world. In my opinion Ni is more likely to develop a life of its own and become somewhat distorted in their views on reality.

What I cant understand is why a NT must be free of imagination. I see that a F is more prone to leave out key logic details, to rather create a harmonious / disharmonious image of a situation, what seems like they have more room for imagination. But in my opinion, I think its rather more room for interpretation, cause you dont follow the rules of maths / physics / the universe or rationality. I dont see, why though, a NT should have a fewer imagination then. To be honest, I felt a bit offended after reading about that part.

Last but not least, I think this is a wise quote to end with:

The various NTs work in different ways too. Some of them don't wear pants.
 

jenocyde

half mystic, half skeksis
Joined
Jan 2, 2009
Messages
6,387
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w8
Actually, you're helping make my point. The things you're seeing involve perceiving a significance, which isn't something that's usually seen logically. Also, you admitted that you're obsessed with the big picture, that you're obsessed with seeing how things might go together, don't like just following steps or sticking to the obvious... you want to read something into things, and sometimes you'll go out of your way to do a task in a way that engages this process. Even if it's not the most logical way. So, there's a mild conflict between the linear tendencies of logic, and the more holistic perceptions of intuition.

I don't know, perhaps I'm just missing something.


I don't believe I used the word obsessed even once. And nothing I said felt like an "admission", so maybe you are missing the point a bit. I'll try to rework it.

The illustration I gave above is one in which I saw a logical pattern. There was a bunch of dots scattered around and I saw the connection. I didn't create them.

Significance is logical to me because all the clues are there. In films, director speak with pictures - that is why they are called motion pictures. If you only hear the dialogue, you will miss a significant amount of information. Camera angles, camera movements, color choices, placements of mirrors and shadows - these all mean something and they are not arbitrary. But if you've never studied film, you would never know this. If I say that a particular character is a fragment of himself or has multiple identities, I am telling you this because we only see the character reflected through glass or mirrors. The choice to film this way is not arbitrary and I am not guessing.

Hitchcock is famous for this mirror technique. You can see it starting with "M", by Fritz Lang. Also, evil spirits/people always move from right to left across a screen - I can list so many films that this occurs. It's called cinematic language. This is film studies 101, but you wouldn't know this unless you studied film. If you haven't studied this, you will only understand the explicit meaning of a film. Once you have studied film language, you will start to understand the implicit meanings. (of course there is always a rogue director who tries to deviate, but most things are pretty much standard. A lot of newbie directors who have never studied film subconsciously repeat the same patterns because they are so ingrained in film society.)

My point in that explanation is that I see my NeTi as studying life and it's patterns, much like we would study cinematic language. I am very aware of how things link together. It's not my imagination. I collect information with my Ne and I identify the patterns with my Ti.

Maybe ST is perhaps the "how it works" and NT is the "why it works" but they are both logical processes. (I can only speak from an NeTi perspective, so I don't know how it manifests in others)
 

entropie

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 24, 2008
Messages
16,767
MBTI Type
entp
Enneagram
783
I wanted to add: in the end, everybody uses a mixture of F and T, therefore the OP question is flawed from the beginning, disregarding of whats said here.
 

jenocyde

half mystic, half skeksis
Joined
Jan 2, 2009
Messages
6,387
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w8
I wanted to add: in the end, everybody uses a mixture of F and T, therefore the OP question is flawed from the beginning, disregarding of whats said here.

+1000000
 

Blackwater

New member
Joined
May 29, 2007
Messages
454
MBTI Type
ERTP
I understand wherre Athenian200 is comming from.

Studies show, that even though the MBTI prides itself on measuring four distinct traits, N and P turn out to be positively correlated. The more intuitarded you are, the more percieving you will also be.*

(* Now how does this relate to dominant intuitives whom nobody would classify as P such as retentive INTJs? - Well the INTJ is in fact able to see many points of view, only they see them inside themselves, in their internal mind's eye. This is what Jung meant when he classified INTJ as a subjective/irrational type.)

In the same way, while the ST/SF split is close to 50/50, the NF/NT split is more like 66/33. So indeed, we have reason to believe that N has some sort of affinity with F.

Athenian200 is also right in saying that T is restricting N: Lots of potential whims will automatically be filtered from conciousness of the NT. Sloganistically speaking, T forces thought into certain patterns whereas F only forces N out of certain thought-trails, namely the ones that are uncomfortable to the F and/or his established values. (INTJs do this as well, but they are, after all closet NFs.)

---

Though Athenian200, even though you could argue that from an indoling point of view N and T do not naturally go together, don't you think that sometimes, the adverse effects of the NT combination turn out to be better than the synergic effects of the NF combination? - Here I am thinking specifically of the ENTPs vs. ENFPs: Ne-users can really be a strain, talking too much and trusting blindly in their whim and spontaneous associations. With Ti, Ne is disciplined whereas with Fi, Ne is encouraged, regardless of the actual worth of the Ne.
 

nozflubber

DoubleplusUngoodNonperson
Joined
Mar 30, 2008
Messages
2,078
MBTI Type
Hype
I've actually been wondering for a while now. It seems like ST and NF make sense, but NT and SF don't.

An ST uses specific, sensed details, and reasons in a linear, impersonal fashion. Basically, the calculator/bean-counter type. I can see those two going together well.

An NF uses their imagination and instinct to get an idea of the "essence" of things, and then weighs this according to their subjective sense of value. These two also go well together.

An NT also uses their imagination and instinct to get an idea of the "essence" of things, and then... reasons in a linear, impersonal fashion?

Intuition is a highly unconscious, somewhat subjective process. It relies on a kind of vague instinct, a subjective perception that can't be expressed literally. So why, then, would you go ahead and stuff all of that into a simplistic, impersonal box that's better suited to simple details? You're perceiving reality subjectively, and then trying to turn around and throw away all of the instinct and irrational process that gave rise to the idea in the first place, to clean it up and push it through a simplistic, linear, impersonal process that can't possibly capture much of what was perceived.

It's almost like it turns against itself halfway through the process in a half-hearted effort to make an appeal that will be listened to by "bean-counter" types.

So, what is an NT, really? Is it an Intuitive that was forced to discipline their imagination into working with logic? Is it a conflicted person who tried to set up a strange compromise between the rational and irrational parts of their mind? Is it someone who wants to hide/destroy their own sensitivity for some reason?

I know that if you're an NT, you might very well understand how it is they go together, and may even think that N and F don't go well together. I'm just curious as to why those processes should work together, and how they fit together for you.



Imo, the problem is your conception of Logic. "Being T" and thinking all the time is a cognitive process. Logic is a "force of reason" that will drive differing parties towards the same answer, given the SAME starting points of those parties. They arent' synonymous.

It is difficult to describe how a "logical crosscheck mechanism" can fit in with something like Ne, however, so you're right about that. If I had to guess, I'd say it just helps my Ne/scenario imagining be as "real" and plausible as I can make it. (or what Blackwater said hehe:) )
 

entropie

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 24, 2008
Messages
16,767
MBTI Type
entp
Enneagram
783
Here I am thinking specifically of the ENTPs vs. ENFPs: Ne-users can really be a strain, talking too much and trusting blindly in their whim and spontaneous associations. With Ti, Ne is disciplined whereas with Fi, Ne is encouraged, regardless of the actual worth of the Ne.

But that doesnt mean the NT is more prone to have less Ne. If you would have a more Te prone ENFP for example, this could also work as a regulating mechanism for him.

I still dont get the point to the topic.
 

Moiety

New member
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Messages
5,996
MBTI Type
ISFJ
I don't know what think about this, but I have thought the same before. N and F being more natural partners than N and T.

I just think "Thinking" is perhaps inherently less holistic maybe....if that makes sense.
 

jenocyde

half mystic, half skeksis
Joined
Jan 2, 2009
Messages
6,387
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w8
In the same way, while the ST/SF split is close to 50/50, the NF/NT split is more like 66/33. So indeed, we have reason to believe that N has some sort of affinity with F.

I don't understand what you mean by "split", can you please explain?

Athenian200 is also right in saying that T is restricting N: Lots of potential whims will automatically be filtered from conciousness of the NT. Sloganistically speaking, T forces thought into certain patterns whereas F only forces N out of certain thought-trails, namely the ones that are uncomfortable to the F and/or his established values. (INTJs do this as well, but they are, after all closet NFs.)

How are you basing this?

Though Athenian200, even though you could argue that from an indoling point of view N and T do not naturally go together, don't you think that sometimes, the adverse effects of the NT combination turn out to be better than the synergic effects of the NF combination? - Here I am thinking specifically of the ENTPs vs. ENFPs: Ne-users can really be a strain, talking too much and trusting blindly in their whim and spontaneous associations. With Ti, Ne is disciplined whereas with Fi, Ne is encouraged, regardless of the actual worth of the Ne.

This is completely subjective and irrelevant, imo.

And N being with T must be natural, I don't believe that any of us are unnatural.

I still dont get the point to the topic.

+1

I think that if people are saying that N and F are "feminine traits" and S and T are "masculine traits", then NT or SF should be more balanced, not less balanced - like yin and yang...

And thinking is not less holistic. Thinking and feeling is what makes you whole in the first place.
 
Last edited:

entropie

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 24, 2008
Messages
16,767
MBTI Type
entp
Enneagram
783
I am surprised you all do think N and T doesnt go together. I think its the key essence to nearly every scientific effort.

Those guys probably in those days, who came up with the idea to find some better belief than the church offered them, to enable people to see that:

"Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law."

These were genius inventors and thinkers. They analyzed a given system, seen that its flawed and then came up with something new. I mean what can someone do else ? This is infact the human reasoning these days and until someone invents something better, its all we can do.

Maybe this whole N + T think really starts to fail when it comes down to understanding people. But given science, new technologies and new discoveries, its an integral part.
 

nozflubber

DoubleplusUngoodNonperson
Joined
Mar 30, 2008
Messages
2,078
MBTI Type
Hype
Guys, N and T don't have to "go together" like automobile parts..... they are cognitve functions. You use them(to process information). They aren't fucking legos
 

Moiety

New member
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Messages
5,996
MBTI Type
ISFJ
Just as a disclaimed I didn't read the topic. Just saying N and F seem to stem from the same place just as S and T. Nothing more really.
 
Top