There's a good example of communication problem I encounter with Ne users sometimes. We say a similar point but it gets convoluted and lost in translation through our different ways of articulating. There have been many times where it seems like there is a full-fledged debate but after awhile both parties realized that they were saying the same thing.
This happens to me and the intj all the time.
Me: I think it is X, Y, and Z..... Him: well, actually *talks for awhile* it's X, Y, and Z. Me: That's what I said? *giggles* It is hysterically funny to be honest and even endearing, ONCE you figure out what is going on.
Hmm, this is interesting. It never occurred to me that other people didn't swap different systems in and out. So you look for the perfect definition and then build your matrix of ideas from there?
Hmm, I suspect that different Ne users will due this different ways. Thus the subsequent confusion and frustration points encountered will differ depending upon the judging functions that differ. I will write up a bunch of specific example and post else where as to not clutter the thread. But the way I approach new subjects has a few steps:
1. I have to have an Fi interest of some sort
2. I build a huge 30,000 ft overview of the subject. This involves gathering as many sources of info as possible on the subject and reading them all, but in a shallow quick way. I am looking for common themes throughout the sources-disregarding differences between the sources for now. I am seeking the gist of the topic, defined as a reoccurant pattern over the course of research. I also will seek root authoritative sources preferably and not rely on interpretations.
3. I build a very broad outline of the subject-I am building my own generalized
context free knowledge base of the subject-perhaps a generic context/generic frame. In my mind this is a framework of boxes, suboxes, all categorical-Te boxes I presume. I dont need to know what is in each box in detail-only where to find the box should I need that information later and how it connects to the other boxes.
4. Because the same information (pattern) is repeated over and over again throughout the sources-the basic, top level backbone/framework of my boxes, and the sub boxes, becomes very certain and is considered to be the most statistically likely truth. It will be hard for one person's opinion to modify this backbone-although I am totally cool with tweaking it or discussing potential alterations. This backbone is what I call "Si" but really is me recalling my Ne patterns through the lens of Si, I presume.
5. The entire time I am using Ne to make the connections that form the backbone-but once built the real fun begins as I can begin filling in the details of the backbone with new connections. I can make huge Ne leaps by connecting this backbone to other topics that I have also built backbones for.
6. The backbone becomes generalized rules that are most likely to be true no matter what specific situation i apply them to. A TeSi rule might be "It is never allowed to speed in a school zone". An FiSi rule might be "I dont want to have a pitbull dog around children". For me-I need to be certain they are about applicable 80% of the time, before I feel comfortable.
7. When a specific instance arises the generalized rule will be brought up in my mind-then I adapt it on the fly with Fi typically to the very specific, unique, individual circumstance in front of me. Perhaps it was okay to speed in a school zone this time-because there was a fire and it was a fire truck. Perhaps this family is very safe with a pitbull as they spent a great deal of time training it and understand the innate needs of the breed. If I dont have an 80% certainty in my backbone-they anything I use NeFi to craft in the moment is very prone to error and internally I am very loathe to share as I know it isnt trustworthy, even as a suggestion.
So I dont need a specific definition (although I suspect the INTPs may), but I do need my generalized backbone. In step 4 above, this is where an Ni dom can throw me off-they swap out pieces of my backbone. This leaves me leaping from Ne point to Ne point....
Cakes have layers...onions too... Cant do much with random Ne connections without a backbone to use for verification.
Once the backbone gets discarded the Ne-Ni convos can be tons of fun, but they sort of wobble off into outer space as I make Ne leaps and then each new Ni site gets Ni swapped, then I Ne leap again. The convo-wobbly-weaves all over the place so as long as you have no specific topic or perspective (or point
) to adhere to, you can have quite a good time.