Managing Ne...hmmm...how to explain this. Perhaps focus it in a direction pertinent to the discussion, I guess. Of course this is only in serious discussions.
No, socially acceptable has nothing to do with it. My preference is to be direct, anticipate and be positional. In order to be this way, I need to understand motivation and direction. No can do with an unfettered Ne-dom since it feels like they're hopping and skipping about.
ahh.
well, one, i agree, unfettered Ne can be extraordinarily annoying. though the other thing it might help to know - as i'll explain better in a sec - is that as a Ne dom goes through all this "random" stuff (it isn't!), we're continually linking our thoughts back to the central point. if you can find a thread of mostly ENFPs anywhere on the forum, you'll notice a pattern that goes like: OP, related, somewhat related, less related, less less related, less less less related, omg, wtf, bbq, OP bbq! it eventually links back precisely to the topic at hand. and that's sort of how it works in my brain, too. i go out information scouting, link-link-link-link-link-link, and eventually end up with a good broad picture relating to the topic. it's really the same thing Ni does, but we do it laterally instead of longitudinally - you guys run on a time axis where we run on a space axis. you're looking for a honed future point but it seems very drawn out to us, whereas ours seems actually more information-dense. my point being (look, see, i did it here!) that what looks like random actually isn't. it's linking across a broad plane via Si detail.
Take what just happened with entropie. I can't begin to describe how confused I am about it. What just happened? It went from civilised discussion to "fuck the sky is falling" in a couple of posts.
you've even got me there, but i have to admit that a couple of your posts directed towards ENxPs made me feel little blips of annoyance, just because of the wording more than the sentiment. it did surprise me when you replied in a serious tone to his comment about amassing, i thought he was mostly joking there. and then you went on to talk about something else about Ne you don't like, which, if i am right about the joking and someone did that to me IRL, i'd find it pretty annoying that they missed my joke, took it seriously (i assume it's relatively common amongst Ne doms to feel "-_-" when someone takes your joke seriously), and then said negative things about a category including me. i mean, to say a group of people one is included in is "usually steeped in misunderstanding" - i mean that reads as relatively offensive to me. with no offense to you; i assume you didn't mean it in a cruel way. but that general pattern might - maybe - be why things went as they did. maybe. apologies, entropie, if i'm wrong.
incidentally --
Jenaphor said:
To expand on that, it has to do with being led without consent. To try to understand Ne doms, you're almost forced to follow them from rabbit hole to rabbit hole until you get the complete picture, much like how they source information in a random fashion. This creates discomfort within me since as a somewhat positional person, I prefer to anticipate. With Ne-doms I don't trust, I won't follow.
haha, this is funny
because Ne is such a benign plaything to me, especially in other Ne doms. but like before - the key is that it's never random. that's why you feel like it's kind of stupid and you can't trust it, i figure? i know i feel the same way about Ni (will explain in a second), but to us, it just looks like we're using the information that is clearly already out there for the taking. there's nothing inherent to my Ne thought processes that's not also available to you, out in the universe. but you're not collecting data with Si - you're collecting data with Se - and that's why you can't see it, i think. because i can't see Se data either.
on my side of things, Ni generally confuses the shit out of me, lol. i feel like the Ni user is making me find an invisible thread, then follow it to an ending that i can't see yet - an ending that's locked in "future time". just like you can't see through the rabbit holes, i can't instinctively see through the time door to the conclusion you've gotten to. i'm beginning to understand how it works, thanks to the forum, but i'm still pretty bad at it. so same here with trust - if i trust the Ni user very much, i'll trust their predictions. but that's what they seem like to me - just guesses. even though i know they're data-based.
It may be an unusual sort of communication style here. I've caught myself doing it sometimes.... where I'll read something sort of nonsequentially and simultaneously and pick up on the general ideas of it, but sometimes it'll be just slightly off from what was said because I neglected a detail or two. Then sometimes I'll jump to interpretations about it automatically and almost unconsciously too, and this makes things even trickier. I'll only notice when I read back over months later and go "what in the world was I thinking there?"
well it would be a high-five if it were cool. i guess it's sort of lame, lol. sometimes it's really helpful to be able to skim so fast, but then sometimes i screw up and only catch a glimpse of what's actually less important but more drama-laden... i guess our eyes are drawn to intense words or something.
This is very interesting. As an INTP, I find myself in the middle of these two very good points. I relate to skylights (ENFP) because I understand Ne enough to know how it works and to know that, indeed, it does supply me with a lot of really good ideas. And I don't want the "abilities" of Ne to be stripped from me. I want those things to be able to flourish. Please don't think I'm calling myself Einstein here, but what comes to mind is trying to throw Einstein in a closet and lock the door on him because he's too "out there" - he's unbridled. So, yeah, we can lock him away to spare ourselves from his outlandish ideas, but at the same time we also lose his genius and his ability to make great connections and his insight, etc.
On the other hand, I also relate to Jenaphor because, like her, I'm a T-dom. So, in certain "serious situations", I want to deal "direct" with people. I don't want to jerk around, I don't want to be funny, I don't want to waste time. I want to get to the point and get to the heart of the matter. Quickly and efficiently. We can goof off later.
I guess my conclusion is that telling an Ne-dom to harness their Ne would be like telling an ENTJ that he can't use Te anymore. He has to rely only on Ni/Se/Fi. Or telling an INTP that he can't use Ti. That'd be rough! As frustrating as unbridled Ne can be at times (I definitely agree with that, but it's probably true of all functions that go unchecked: Te, Ti included), it has to be allowed to flourish and to "do it's thing" or else we're essentially limiting its abilities.
P.S. Bolded are the points I relate to from both sides.
This is true. Good point. I haul in Ti all the time. I see inefficiencies left and right and want to say something, but people don't want to hear it, so I have to "leave it unsaid". So, why not Ne too?!
The question isn't so much "why?" but "how?"
Some things are just automatic.... but as far as being more tactful in what you say, I know what you mean. That's just a matter of being more aware of people and thinking at least a tiny bit before speaking.
lol yeah. with Ti you've already made your judgment... with Ne, my process speeds up if i say it out loud. i don't think that's true for Ti? that's why it's tempting, to extravert it. because it works faster that way. Einstein likes the fresh air outside the closet.
though seriously i've discovered that paper is my BFF. i ALWAYS have a pad of paper and a pen wherever i go. then i can be my own sounding board.
I have to disagree with these points. First off corelating values/ethics/morals as cognitive processes is wrong. They have very little to do with types. (I do understand skylights may not have said this directly, but bare with me) How the different cognitive processes word their conclusion might be very different even if their aim is the same. Like a marksman can stand in many angles but still hit the same spot. That dont mean you as a Fi user are more likely to agree with a Te user in a debate. You may have a slightly better chance understanding the words, but may disagree with the aim.*
I may morally and internally agree more with a Fi user than a Fe user and dont understand how the Fe user could ever think or behave in such a manner. Why would you think that type means behavior and ethics/morals? Its cognitive processes to generate the input you recieve and then communicate it out, not your whole consciousness. They may be support for how you rationalize but is not the deciding factor for the choices you make in life.
hm, i missed this before, sorry slowriot.
well okay, for both you and others, my little comment about the messy room and debate was definitely just a stereotype-based joke. i know a messy-ass INTJ and i know an INTP who HATES messes.
anyway, i do totally agree with what you're saying - i just also have to say that from experience, i
do end up agreeing with Te/Fi users more often in debate. i think it's exactly what you said about having a better chance of understanding - what i suspect is that this is more of a language barrier when it comes to ethics and whatnot, instead of me actually sharing the same values with other Te/Fi users - but i can't deny that it happens. i wish i had a list of all the misunderstandings i've had with my INTP dad when we were really trying to communicate the exact same thing, but we were doing it in totally different wording. it would be huge.
! I am a jokester as well, but deep inside me lies the secret Fi lair where no smiles shall pass when Fi is mad. Once Fi is happy again... then it's all sunshine, kittens, and unicorns! 
