Ni: "Mapping Between Signs and Meaning"

[pippi]

An Ni perspective leads one to seek out the leverage points of any system. What is triggering what?

I liked this bit of the description, Ni is always trying to figure out what the underlying cause is. It goes under the surface and wants to understand what makes everything tick. That understanding leads to the links in a different way than Ne does it.

 

[Apollanaut]

I liked this bit of the description, Ni is always trying to figure out what the underlying cause is. It goes under the surface and wants to understand what makes everything tick. That understanding leads to the links in a different way than Ne does it.

Yes! This aspect of Ni is so strong in me that I find it difficult to listen to someone who is talking at length - my mind keeps simultaneously trying to figure out what is going on beneath the surface with that person, what is the real purpose of their communication, what is the gist of what they're trying to say, what is important and what is just padding, how can I best reach this person etc, etc.

 

[Quinlan]

There's nothing quite like a well thrown monkey wrench.

 

[Kyrielle]

Here is where I'm confused... how are archetypes in anyway "mystical"?

I know one of Jung's theories besides cognitive function are archetypes and the collective unconscious, which as Babylon said there's no evidence in support of. Putting that aside, I can see how Ni would grab onto archetypes due to its symbolic nature. But I don't see the link between the archetypes and predicting the future.

The Ah-hah moments of Ni happens when it teases out hidden connections between ideas and from that revealing some underlying pattern. The Ni intuitive hunch is nothing more than an expansion of that. Ni works with the underlying assumption that things are likely connected and if you search deep enough you'll see the pattern. Anything that doesn't seem to fit this pattern sets off a warning. Something's off, which needs further looking into.

The reverse case is "I 'know' this is so", but I can't tell you why. That would be Ni sensing the pattern but you're unable to articulate just what exactly this pattern might be.

Neither of these are in anyway "mystical" or "prophetical". Because if you use Ti and look back, more times than not you'll see exactly what pieces of info led you to those conclusions. This isn't due to god or some higher being telling you things.

I like this and your other definitions of what Ni is.

Edit: In regards to the art thing, I often feel like the process for my art is:

a.) create an art piece
b.) ponder over it
c.) discover it's meaning

notice which element is LAST in that order...it always freaks me out how my mind can apparently think of things or come up with things that, consciously, it has no capacity to understand. A-ha moments for me tend to be really spatial. Like the way I build stories in my worlds tends to be, I will draw the character first, then maybe a few days later while thinking about the drawing, suddenly from nowhere it will come to me who the character is, what their purpose is in the world, and how they fit into the "pattern" of the narrative. Maybe that's not at all artistic Ni, but when I first heard the description of the characteristics of it, I just automatically made those connections with how I can definitively discover territories in my imagination.

Yes. That's how it happens with me. Almost word-for-word. And I'm guessing that if you stop and think about why you're doing something in your art, while you're physically creating it, you suddenly lose whatever connection there was and start overthinking things. (I do that a lot anyway. That's why when anyone tells me to "You should be thinking about x, y, z." I completely ignore that command and just log the information away and draw what needs to be drawn how I feel it should be depicted. Then I go back and change things around.)

 

[nightning]

You'll note that I actually said "appear to be mystical" rather than "is mystical" in my original post.

...

Ni in particular is interested in the unseen and unknown (at least it is in me!), it therefore has a tendency to wander into territories for which there are no rational or scientific definitions, or even, sometimes, a language to express what it is perceiving. This, to my mind, is highly desirable - how else can new knowledge be discovered? If we were only ever allowed to use what is known and commonly accepted as "facts" there would be no new knowledge and no point whatsoever to intuition.

Ah, yes I agree with you there that to the outside observer... Ni might appear to be mystical. Actually sometimes my Ni also come up with surprising connections. Especially when I'm not even thinking about the problem and just doing chores like washing dishes and it hits me.

In a way as you said, all that seems like an subconscious sort of processing. I wouldn't attribute it to the collective unconscious, but definitely it's useful in exploring new ideas.

Edit: In regards to the art thing, I often feel like the process for my art is:

a.) create an art piece
b.) ponder over it
c.) discover it's meaning

notice which element is LAST in that order...it always freaks me out how my mind can apparently think of things or come up with things that, consciously, it has no capacity to understand. A-ha moments for me tend to be really spatial. Like the way I build stories in my worlds tends to be, I will draw the character first, then maybe a few days later while thinking about the drawing, suddenly from nowhere it will come to me who the character is, what their purpose is in the world, and how they fit into the "pattern" of the narrative. Maybe that's not at all artistic Ni, but when I first heard the description of the characteristics of it, I just automatically made those connections with how I can definitively discover territories in my imagination.

Yes. That's how it happens with me. Almost word-for-word. And I'm guessing that if you stop and think about why you're doing something in your art, while you're physically creating it, you suddenly lose whatever connection there was and start overthinking things. (I do that a lot anyway. That's why when anyone tells me to "You should be thinking about x, y, z." I completely ignore that command and just log the information away and draw what needs to be drawn how I feel it should be depicted. Then I go back and change things around.)

Hmmm that's interesting. The way I go about things is a bit different. I randomly stumble upon an idea that I thought would be interesting... then I grab my pencil and paper to start sketching whatever I had on my mind. It's as if I have the image or the major portion of it in my head and I'm just frantically trying to replicate that on paper before the image goes poof. I leave the details last... but the concept comes to me more or less completely before I even pick up the pencil. But then again I'm more of an idea person than an artist. Perhaps that's why it's different.

 

[Apollanaut]

Hmmm that's interesting. The way I go about things is a bit different. I randomly stumble upon an idea that I thought would be interesting... then I grab my pencil and paper to start sketching whatever I had on my mind. It's as if I have the image or the major portion of it in my head and I'm just frantically trying to replicate that on paper before the image goes poof. I leave the details last... but the concept comes to me more or less completely before I even pick up the pencil. But then again I'm more of an idea person than an artist. Perhaps that's why it's different.

My approach is similar to yours, but then I'm also an ideas person. However, I have had some experience of the "artistic" thing. Perhaps Ni can work both ways, according to the need?

 

[Nocapszy]

Because this description is so different than the usual ones, I'm curious to hear whether you agree with this description and whether you find it sufficient (as in, it is not necessary to add the 'future seeing' aspect of Ni to the description).

Indeed. Thompson is the only Jung author I've ever recommended. I don't even recommend Jung. He fucked a lot up.

 

[Venom]

Yes! This aspect of Ni is so strong in me that I find it difficult to listen to someone who is talking at length - my mind keeps simultaneously trying to figure out what is going on beneath the surface with that person, what is the real purpose of their communication, what is the gist of what they're trying to say, what is important and what is just padding

no wonder they say INFJs are natural conspiracy theorists

im glad i have the power (Ni)...but i prefer to keep it a slave to the Te-Se axis....

 

[Apollanaut]

no wonder they say INFJs are natural conspiracy theorists

Oh yes!

im glad i have the power (Ni)...but i prefer to keep it a slave to the Te-Se axis....

Nooooo!!!! What a terrible fate - set it free!!!

 

[Venom]

Oh yes!



Nooooo!!!! What a terrible fate - set it free!!!

{sees how unhappy most INFJs are} ....um... no thanks! :hi: ...inferior Fi is bad enough, i dont need Dom Ni too!

 

[Hendo Barbarosa]

Hmmm that's interesting. The way I go about things is a bit different. I randomly stumble upon an idea that I thought would be interesting... then I grab my pencil and paper to start sketching whatever I had on my mind. It's as if I have the image or the major portion of it in my head and I'm just frantically trying to replicate that on paper before the image goes poof. I leave the details last... but the concept comes to me more or less completely before I even pick up the pencil. But then again I'm more of an idea person than an artist. Perhaps that's why it's different.

I dunno...this is making me doubt my T now. I do that with other things...just not with the act of drawing. It's almost like an Ni trust-fall for me when I draw...I'm kind of counting on that intuition to give me the details that I know fit into a framework, somehow...I just need to coax them out, like feeding nuts to a squirrel. Once they are in play though, they definitely err on the side of rationality. It's almost like my mind spits out an image, and the image is incredibly symbolic and abstract, and then my conscious mind is like "well this won't do. What do all of these symbols mean?" and then tries to find the logical context of the abstract piece.

 

[Apollanaut]

{sees how unhappy most INFJs are} ....um... no thanks! :hi: ...inferior Fi is bad enough, i dont need Dom Ni too!

I'm happy! I'm always full of sunshine and light (well most of the time, anyway). However, you are right to stick with your Dom Te as it's what our society prefers. As an INFJ, Te is looong way from my consciousness and my career has definitely suffered as a result.

 

[sade]

Hmmm that's interesting. The way I go about things is a bit different. I randomly stumble upon an idea that I thought would be interesting... then I grab my pencil and paper to start sketching whatever I had on my mind. It's as if I have the image or the major portion of it in my head and I'm just frantically trying to replicate that on paper before the image goes poof. I leave the details last... but the concept comes to me more or less completely before I even pick up the pencil. But then again I'm more of an idea person than an artist. Perhaps that's why it's different.

Funny, that's the way I always go about in writing or drawing. I'm just trying to capture the idea that popped to my mind as fast as I can, before it fades away. It frustrates me that I can't be fast enough.

 

[nonsequitur]

I really like this description, it has relevance to how I learn about science as well.

A conversation that I had last night while tutoring a friend (who has the same qualifications as me but no background in chem) for her pre-med exam.

Me: So, if you think about how a polyacrylamide gel works, for example, the acrylamide functions as an alkene that gets polymerised. The concentration of the acrylamide determines how close together the molecules are - hence, the pore size of the gel. To start of the reaction, you add APS and TEMED. APS is a peroxy oxidant, which generates free radicals, and the TEMED catalyses this. So you have a polymerisation reaction driven by free radicals.

Have you ever felt the tube that you pour the gel into?

Her: No, why would I do that?

Me: The tube is hot, because of the bonds that are forming. That process is exothermic.

Her: Huh. I don't think I've ever been taught this before.

Me: Neither have I, I just learnt the individual concepts and put everything together.

The understanding happened subconsciously, too. I didn't know that I knew it until I explained everything in a Te-driven manner. It just was how it happened to me.

My friend got through uni without understanding anything that she learnt, I suspect. She relied on memory - and now is panicking with the postgrad premed exam, because it is a test based on reasoning and logic games - which she seldom uses.

Last night I realised how useful Ni/Te was... There are quite a few people who just don't think in this way naturally, and it takes a lot of effort for them to put things together.

Here is an analogy that I have for the Ni process (crystallisation). There are many molecules swimming together in solution, let's say that you have a supersaturated solution that has been cooled, and nothing's crystallised yet. You put in a seed crystal and bang! Everything crystallises at once, forming a networked, ordered structure (that also happens to be quite beautiful ). The crystals that form are big and differ from beaker to beaker - but when you look down a the microscopic level, they have the same structure and are made of the same molecules.

 

[sade]

I went back and actually read the page, and the quoted section is a really really good definition of Ni. I can relate to it very well. Especially the "about the box" -part.

 

[Hendo Barbarosa]

I like that element of it, but I almost do agree with nightning that it could be a bit more specific. I'd probably say something like about the ASSET versus outside the ASSET.

I was thinking about how Ni tends to think more like a video game. You know how when you play a video game, a lot of arbitrary rules get thrown around here and there, and instead of being like "THIS DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE ACCORDING TO WHAT I KNOW ABOUT THE WORLD" (which is fine, even useful in other situations) you tend to use the rules and abilities and environments that you actively observe to give your very definition of the game, and how you should play in it. What, exactly, you should be doing, to move towards (ideally) a goal.

Now, with Ni...it's almost like LIFE is that game, and the exact definitions of things, although important in the right context, aren't absolutely important. Their absolute importance is almost defined by their...usefulness? At least within the given scenario (i.e., the video game)

 

[redacted]

I like interpretation 3 the best.

 

[cascadeco]

I like interpretation 3 the best.

I hadn't looked at the website initially, but just did.

This example from interp. 3 is something I do ALL the time, with pretty much everyone/everything:

For example, whereas from an Extraverted Sensation perspective, you might feel very impressed upon meeting a man wearing a fancy Italian suit (signs call forth a natural response and need no interpretation); from an Ni perspective, you would consciously say to yourself that he's wearing an Italian suit and this is supposed to make you think he's wealthy or upper-class or really has his act together or something like that, and therefore is supposed to make you feel impressed (signs and what they mean are connected only arbitrarily). Whether he really does have his act together is a matter upon which you reserve judgement. Consequently you don't feel impressed. You merely note the expected interpretation as no less a part of your environment than the suit itself.

 

[Glycerine]

I hadn't looked at the website initially, but just did.

This example from interp. 3 is something I do ALL the time, with pretty much everyone/everything:

For example, whereas from an Extraverted Sensation perspective, you might feel very impressed upon meeting a man wearing a fancy Italian suit (signs call forth a natural response and need no interpretation); from an Ni perspective, you would consciously say to yourself that he's wearing an Italian suit and this is supposed to make you think he's wealthy or upper-class or really has his act together or something like that, and therefore is supposed to make you feel impressed (signs and what they mean are connected only arbitrarily). Whether he really does have his act together is a matter upon which you reserve judgement. Consequently you don't feel impressed. You merely note the expected interpretation as no less a part of your environment than the suit itself.

Is this what makes INFJ's skeptical of people and and rarely take things at face value? I've noticed if I meet someone who seems extremely nice and outgoing, I'll still question it inside my head. "Is it all an act?" "Are they truly a nice person or are they hiding behind something?" Are they trying to deceive me?". I'm always closely examining people to verify if they are being genuine or fake.

 

[beyondaurora]

I hadn't looked at the website initially, but just did.

This example from interp. 3 is something I do ALL the time, with pretty much everyone/everything:

For example, whereas from an Extraverted Sensation perspective, you might feel very impressed upon meeting a man wearing a fancy Italian suit (signs call forth a natural response and need no interpretation); from an Ni perspective, you would consciously say to yourself that he's wearing an Italian suit and this is supposed to make you think he's wealthy or upper-class or really has his act together or something like that, and therefore is supposed to make you feel impressed (signs and what they mean are connected only arbitrarily). Whether he really does have his act together is a matter upon which you reserve judgement. Consequently you don't feel impressed. You merely note the expected interpretation as no less a part of your environment than the suit itself.

^I live and breathe this.