Hmm, that must be frustrating. I think you are right that it's a little harder to see where Ni users are coming from if they don't outline it. Fe may make them feel like they need interest and invitation to do so, rather than doing it spontaneously and Ti may make it difficult to delineate their thoughts right away. I think because I'm a Ni dom, I'm not even aware of using Ni. I used to assume that everyone prefers to look down the road and rule out options that don't look like they will turn out well based on observation, past experience and deduction. It seems so real to me that I almost sometimes feel like I would be insulting someone by pointing it out, or else I feel that they would not be receptive to hearing it (I think Ni tends to focus on obstacles and negative rather than possibilities and positives because it rules things out first). Many people see this preventative tendancy to look at possible areas of concern rather than areas of possibility first as being negative, cynical, over-cautious or crackpot-y. It's kind of putting yourself out there to tell someone about what you see, particularly if the person may not like to hear it, so I check and double check that the person is open to hearing it before preceding. Usually my ENFJ mother tends to be over vocal about those kinds of things and then feels badly after, while I tend to be under vocal about it and wish I had said more.
ahhh. that makes a lot of sense, thank you. i like how you phrased what i italicized... that helps me understand Ni better. sometimes it seems like such a confusing thing, but that is clear. so what i'm interpreting as haughtiness may really even be a reluctance to insult by stating the obvious?
of all the things i would not have thought of! pleasant to hear, though.
Ni likes to apply a particular concept to as many different contexts as possible and see if it still holds true. To me it appears that Ne does just the opposite. It tries to build a context and then gathers possible information. Therefore it's very frustrating when the context keeps shifting.
yes... i almost want to say we build... like... sets? we collect micro-systems? and then we connect them? if you pictured a set of systems - say the enneagram, MBTI, OCEAN, and socionics, all as planes stacked like a set of plates, with "points" at certain types, then what Ne (at least, inasmuch as i understand it) does is run a string through certain points, aligning the chosen systems with one another. i pull in 7, Se, Openess, and Si (possibly a bad example) in to all align with one another and create a new "paradigm", or total alignment of sets. a vertical or diagonal plane running through the plates, if you will. it's changing content, instead of context. and while i'm doing that the Ni user is sitting over here flipping the MBTI on its head and asking if its rules still apply. but i don't really have a problem with that... i've never really been opposed to Ni itself, just to my own lack of understanding. i know something brilliant is going on in there and it frustrates me to not know what it is! and the other person's reluctance to share is like insult to ineptitude...
Supporting an NFJ when they're really worried about something? Listen to them till they are done venting, even if it is ridiculous. Know that you are helping them wade through all the emotional debris around them so that they can sort out what is useful and what is not. Them talking will help them start sorting, so the more questions you can ask to gain context will make them feel like they are on more solid footing and can see what they are working with. It also helps them to feel that you really want to understand the situation and makes them more receptive to input later on. Help them identify what it really is that's bothering them by asking questions rather than only offering sympathy or trying to help them work through emotions. Emotions are not particularly important to them, other than being signposts that something is not well right now and needs attending to. Try to avoid being the devil's advocate at all during the venting/worried stage. Just ask questions about what they are talking about. They will likely shift energy after a bit after they feel they have identified what's really bothering them and then are more likely to get whatever help from you they may need in solving it, or they may feel you have already done them a great service just by listening.
I would recommend reading Z Buck's blog on this stuff.
excellent. thank you. and yeah, sometimes it feels a little ridiculous/fatalistic, but i know it's just part and parcel to the positive side of Ni. it must be an uncomfortable place... sort of the counterpart of Ne users getting lost in too many possibilities.
The objective part would be that there appears to be an ocean at all. Concepts already formed. Which is what you said, but I wanted to place more emphasis on the "looking through" aspect because it doesn't seem to me as if I do that kind of thing when conceptualising. Whether I do or don't do what I do by looking through alternatives, looking through alternatives is not how I'd prefer to describe my process. For better or worse I view what I do as sui generis construction. Information is sometimes required from outside, and actually it is that point particularly that tells me I am mostly dealing with inner stuff that I mold as I choose to build up a conception, which conception I will from time to time launch applications of into the world and see if they will float.
NB all: any time you use a physical metaphor for describing intuition, you're introducing unconcious bias that undermines your message. None of the physical metaphors so far presented and supposed to describe the extent and limitation of the various brands of intuition speak to me. Intuition is intuition. WHY DO ANY OF YOUR METAPHORS INFORM?
EDIT: besides, "pearl necklace", really? People still do that outside of porn?
interesting, what you said about your Ni process being sui generis. i know what you mean about not choosing to word it that way. that kept happening in the Fi/Fe threads... we would have similar concepts, but different wordings felt right to us.
anyway Ne draws parallels... metaphors are a fast way to set up two complex structures and jump similarity to similarity, instead of having to start at the beginning and construct a whole picture... any words you choose to use will necessarily introduce bias too, though, because of their connotations. so might as well start with an easily-understandable metaphor, and then begin tailoring it more and more to the real thing...
edit - i've analyzed this too much. i don't know.