What does Extroverted Intuition look like?

[Misty_Mountain_Rose]

I have a hard time conceptualizing Ne. Its a bit as odd as Si to me.

Does anyone have a good way of explaining introverted (fixed, sorry) extroverted intuition that would make sense? Or perhaps what is the difference between Ne and Ni in how it works?

Most of the other functions make sense on a kind of instinctual level to me, but this one doesn't.

 

[simulatedworld]

The most common response I hear is that Ne is outside the box and Ni is about the box.

Ni, as I understand it, recognizes implied symbolism. I read an example somewhere that said if you see a man in a nice suit, Si would instinctually relate that to nice suits it's seen before and infer that this guy is rich or important. Ni would simply observe, "Hmm, that suit is a symbol that's supposed to convey the message of being rich or important. What if I instead assume that he's not?"

The Ne response here would be rather something like, "Wouldn't it be funny if he were wearing his pants on his head instead?"

Not literally, but that's symbolic of what Ne does.

A key difference is that Ne wants external validation, because it seeks connections that exist in the outer world, independently of our minds. To Ne, those patterns and connections would still be there even if we weren't--that's where it differs from Ni.

To Ni, it's all just a matter of perception anyway, but Ne looks to make connections that show a degree of external validity, and in the case of NTPs, Ti usually forces it into a logical category. Notice how NTPs will make extensive efforts to make sure you understand the reasoning for why their position is the most reasonable--Ne says the evidence is available out there in the world of ideas and possibilities, look for yourself!

NTJs won't spend time explaining nearly as often. Ni says: If you don't understand, then you don't understand my perspective and you never really will due to subjective perceptual differences. (Te then steps in to get stuff quantitatively done, rather than Ne+Ti's endless posturing.) After all, the pattern or interpretation that I see only exists within me, anyway--trying to explain it to your liking doesn't really serve my goals in any meaningful way. Ni has no real desire to be fully understood by others.

I made this up, but I think it works...

Say you come upon a fence. Se might say, "Let's climb the fence and see what's over there!"

Ne might respond, "No, we should build a rocket ship out of these scrap parts and fly over it!"

Ne is a lot more oriented toward seeing possibilities for action or connection between things in the external world, kind of like Se but for ideas instead of physical/spatial relations.

Ni and Si are more of just attitudes. Si orients by recalling past concrete experience and reasoning that it's better to stick to what we know because that's safe. Si is a force of stabilization and tradition; Ne is the opposing attitude of exploring the unknown and going totally outside the box. Ne hates the idea of doing something one way just because that's what been done before--in fact, to Ne, "it's been done this way before" is a reason NOT to do it that way. Where's the fun in that?

Ne is much too busy toying around with the pieces and playing with possibilities just for its own sake to notice Ni asking: "What does the presence of this fence imply about the people who put it here? Isn't that supposed to mean they want us to keep out?"

 

[garbage]

For me, any word or phrase can trigger thoughts that are tangential to the original context, then other points of commonality from the original context to these tangential contexts are discovered. I can exploit these commonalities from there.

Sometimes these commonalities are difficult to pinpoint and verbalize, but they can often be abstracted into some overarching framework that explains them all. For example, my fellow simulation researcher ENTP basically made the claim that the subject domain that we're researching--be it business, medical, or engineering--is basically just a data source for us, and they're looking for similar solutions in many cases. Others would say that he's an oddball for thinking this way, but I wholeheartedly agree.

Most any project that I'm working on is like others that I've worked on before; I almost already know how to accomplish it. Most any skill that I'm trying to develop uses such-and-such a principle that I'm already familiar with. With most anyone, I can find common ground for a detailed discussion. And so on.

At least.. that would be my initial approach. Sometimes it can be hard to spot the stark differences that make one context incompatible with another. It's usually in the details, which I tend to gloss over

To others, the contexts that are "tied together" are completely unrelated. But I can't help but find their similarities.


Also, this might be a good read. It seems accurate enough for how I tend to experience it.

 

[VagrantFarce]

Ne unchained: YouTube - Pot Noodle

Just watch a stand-up comedian take on a heckler, like this:

YouTube - Jimmy Carr handles heckler

This is a great one as well:

YouTube - Paul Merton's Inspired Response

I think most comedians tend to be Ne-dominant, or at least have an Ne/Fe pairing.

 

[Engler]

According to your representation of Ni/Ne, simulatedworld, I am significantly more oriented towards Ni.

My thoughts are more oriented towards the understanding of the "big picture" (whatever that may be), instead of the manipulation and perception of external data, so as to achieve a novel result.

 

[Lady_X]

whoa...reading that link greed. i've never read that. that's a really good description.

 

[wolfy]

I think this is a great video of Ne in use...something in his environment triggered it.
[YOUTUBE="AU8PId_6xec"]Feynman : Inconceivable nature of nature[/YOUTUBE]

 

[Lady_X]

that's a great video wolfie. my initial reaction was enfp...but i think it's because i don't know any entps...do you know what he is?

 

[Costrin]

that's a great video wolfie. my initial reaction was enfp...but i think it's because i don't know any entps...do you know what he is?

ENTP supposedly.

 

[wolfy]

that's a great video wolfie. my initial reaction was enfp...but i think it's because i don't know any entps...do you know what he is?

ENTP. Often held up as the best example of ENTP. His books are great btw.

 

[Lady_X]

sure yeah of course he is...interesting though...style of speech and mannerisms are very similar.

 

[simulatedworld]

According to your representation of Ni/Ne, simulatedworld, I am significantly more oriented towards Ni.

My thoughts are more oriented towards the understanding of the "big picture" (whatever that may be), instead of the manipulation and perception of external data, so as to achieve a novel result.

Ne finds the big picture too. It gets its way by rewriting the rules however it sees fit...but the main difference is that it believes the patterns it searches to be externally existent, where Ni does not.

Ne says: There are so many possible interpretations of this; I should learn all of them so that I can have the greatest chance of approximating a truly objective viewpoint. Ne leaves no stone unturned in its search for new patterns and puzzles to play with, which leads it to an occasional huge breakthrough, but largely a lot of toying around and finding nothing all that useful.

Ni says: There are so many possible interpretations of this that true objectivity is not worth searching for. I should simply choose the approach that seems most intuitively correct to me and stick with that until shown a compelling reason that I should change my interpretation--especially when coupled with Te, it often says that if we spend too much time analyzing EVERY possible interpretation, we're wasting time that could be spent toward reaching measurable goals. Ni is very aware of numerous different possible interpretations--so aware, in fact, that it sees everything as totally up to interpretation--but doesn't tend to like the idea of trying to incorporate too many perspectives into one methodology...that's simply inefficient.

Not sure if that helps at all.

 

[Engler]

Ne finds the big picture too. It gets its way by rewriting the rules however it sees fit...but the main difference is that it believes the patterns it searches to be externally existent, where Ni does not.

Ne says: There are so many possible interpretations of this; I should learn all of them so that I can have the greatest chance of approximating a truly objective viewpoint. Ne leaves no stone unturned in its search for new patterns and puzzles to play with, which leads it to an occasional huge breakthrough, but largely a lot of toying around and finding nothing all that useful.

Ni says: There are so many possible interpretations of this that true objectivity is not worth searching for. I should simply choose the approach that seems most intuitively correct to me and stick with that until shown a compelling reason that I should change my interpretation--especially when coupled with Te, it often says that if we spend too much time analyzing EVERY possible interpretation, we're wasting time that could be spent toward reaching measurable goals. Ni is very aware of numerous different possible interpretations--so aware, in fact, that it sees everything as totally up to interpretation--but doesn't tend to like the idea of trying to incorporate too many perspectives into one methodology...that's simply inefficient.

Not sure if that helps at all.

My perspective is more along the lines of "Whether or not externally detected patterns are existent is irrelevant, as I have no way of directly perceiving them."

Frankly, after reading numerous descriptions of both Ni and Ne, a compound form of both is the most applicable for me.

 

[BallentineChen]

Ni says: There are so many possible interpretations of this that true objectivity is not worth searching for. I should simply choose the approach that seems most intuitively correct to me and stick with that until shown a compelling reason that I should change my interpretation--especially when coupled with Te, it often says that if we spend too much time analyzing EVERY possible interpretation, we're wasting time that could be spent toward reaching measurable goals. Ni is very aware of numerous different possible interpretations--so aware, in fact, that it sees everything as totally up to interpretation--but doesn't tend to like the idea of trying to incorporate too many perspectives into one methodology...that's simply inefficient.

I don't really agree with this. If extraverted intution is about exploring multiple perspectives to be closer to true objectivity, introverted intution is about finding the transcendent perspective that incorporates all other perspectives. I don't believe how true this statement really is, since Jung never described Ne and Ni in those terms. He described Ne as the ability to perceive the essence of an object (what the person observes) beyond it's surface appearance, which allows them to see potential. Think of Se but with more abstraction. Ni is like Ne but the process in inverted inwards towards the subject (the person). Ni perceives what lies just beyond our consciousness, for example the reasons underlying our motives (i.e. am I really doing this for altruism or for ulterior motives). Intuition is a perceiving function. Ne is the perception of the essence of objects, Ni is the perception of the essence of the subject.

 

[redacted]

Ne and Ni do the same thing, but the focus is different. Ni wants depth; it will sacrifice paying attention to new environmental factors for looking more deeply at one factor. Ne wants breadth; it will sacrifice depth for novelty.

 

[Lady_X]

just read this too...

Dominant Extraverted Intuition
ENTP & ENFP What is it like?

By Danielle Poirier Rebel Eagle Productions
© copyright Rebel Eagle Productions

Words, ideas and possibilities spew effortlessly from them. Words are their best friends. They dance around ideas, the more, the merrier. Imaginative, spontaneous, original and enthusiastic, they have a knack for seeing other possibilities, other dreams and options. The world is never as it is but as it could be, as if it were but an artists sketch begging for colour. They initiate change and often are prone to trespassing a few known boundaries to take themselves and others where no one has been before. The status quo tends to lack inspiration.

When inspired, they are fearless and tireless. Their energy will know no limits unless red tape takes over. Routine drags them down. Their faith in possibilities and belief in the benefit of change often inspire others to follow. They are challenging, ingenious and innovative. They will give their best to what appears to be an impossible challenge, a place unknown to man or beast.

They use metaphors, stories, images and analogies to make their point.They love theories and often shape their own. They see patterns emerging. Keen improvisers, they are rarely caught off guard, there is always something up their sleeve. The sky is the only limit.

They are sometimes entertainers, artists or otherwise engaged in public demonstrations that allow their ideas to bloom. Their greatest difficulty is not in initiating projects but in choosing among so many possibilities, setting realistic boundaries, establishing priorities and correctly assessing resources.

 

[Little Linguist]

For me, any word or phrase can trigger thoughts that are tangential to the original context, then other points of commonality from the original context to these tangential contexts are discovered. I can exploit these commonalities from there.

Sometimes these commonalities are difficult to pinpoint and verbalize, but they can often be abstracted into some overarching framework that explains them all. For example, my fellow simulation researcher ENTP basically made the claim that the subject domain that we're researching--be it business, medical, or engineering--is basically just a data source for us, and they're looking for similar solutions in many cases. Others would say that he's an oddball for thinking this way, but I wholeheartedly agree.

Most any project that I'm working on is like others that I've worked on before; I almost already know how to accomplish it. Most any skill that I'm trying to develop uses such-and-such a principle that I'm already familiar with. With most anyone, I can find common ground for a detailed discussion. And so on.

At least.. that would be my initial approach. Sometimes it can be hard to spot the stark differences that make one context incompatible with another. It's usually in the details, which I tend to gloss over

To others, the contexts that are "tied together" are completely unrelated. But I can't help but find their similarities.


Also, this might be a good read. It seems accurate enough for how I tend to experience it.

YES; THAT IS EXACTLY IT!!!!!! I have hardly read anything so fitting as this description, and thank you for sharing this with the OP and the rest of us because the thread you linked us to was quite enlightening.

My husband often complains about this tendency of mine. He says, "You are never content with what you HAVE. You are always STRIVING for something new - to DEVELOP in some other way, but you are not CONTENT. This is particularly dangerous nowadays because you don't have the ability to be PATIENT and let things COME to you. Rather, you actively SEEK NEW ways of looking at things, CAREER developments, etc....Kaum bist du irgendwo, ZAK! suchst du eine neue Möglichkeit (You've just managed to achieve something, and BOOM you're looking for a new possibility)." I drive the poor guy bonkers up a tree. It's really amazing he's so patient with me. I'm really lucky to have such a great husband.

Anyway, WAIT A MINUTE - there you go, that's something else....Analyze what I've just written (wait, what the hell did I just write???) I started with thanking you, running to my ideas about it, which I didn't get into because if I did, I'd write a bloody book so I'd rather just sit on my ass and think about it, but not too long. Then, an analogy in the form of an example which I linked it to, and then talked about my husband and how great he puts up with me. Thanks ---> ideas ---> example ---> husband.

Um, okay no connection for many of you, but for me. And this is just one little tangent. I have tangents all the time in my brain. And connections that just don't make sense to most people.

Oh yeah, and I act quite crazy, sporadic, and erratic - well, I don't think so, but most people THINK that because they just can't CATCH UP...you know, well, yeah, I hope that kind of helped a bit. If not, I can try to explain but it's kind of hard because right now my Te is on vacation, so I'm not feeling very structured at the moment, which is why I felt it would be a great time to talk about Ne because my Ne is a bit crazy and untethered at the moment.


Oh, oh, oh, which reminds me of a big, huge-ass difference between my INTX husband and me. So yeah, he notices various aspects in a practical manner and focuses on one thing, and I think that is either Ti or Ni. However, I am not totally sure and could be talking out my ass. Whereas, I kind of hop-scotch around so he hasn't dealt with the first thing I've mentioned when I'm already on the fourth thing. Yet, he can't process all the stuff his dominated introverted function takes a great deal longer than mine to PROCESS stuff.... Therefore, I think, "Damn it, catch up!!!" and he's grumpy and says, "Would you wait a damn minute and back up and let's talk about one thing at a time?" As a result, we both think that the other person is ape crazy when we're really just kind of balancing out aspects of "Yawwwwwnnnnn, let's move on to something else." and "Yawwwwwwn if you're not serious, then screw you." You know?

 

[Jaguar]

Introverted iNtuition (Ni)

* Foreseeing
* Conceptualizing
* Understanding complex patterns
* Synthesizing and symbolizing
* Future

"This is how it will be."
"Aha, that's it!"

When Ni is a preferred process:

* You usually feel a certainty about what is going to happen, often without much detail and without being able to trace the actual data that would support the prediction.
* You focus on "what will be."
* You are energized by transformational visions of how someone can grow or of a completely original approach to get there.
* You are drawn to make those visions manifest.
* Frequently you experience flashes of insight that present themselves as very broad themes and complex whole patterns or systems of thought without being triggered by external events.
* Inner images come as a knowing that taps into universal symbols and with a certainty that they are true.

Introverted Intuiting is about Seeking Insights and Meanings

It focuses on:

* Identifying underlying meaning
* Identifying the inter-relatedness of data
* Synthesizing the information to reveal the "golden nuggets"

Its approach is to:

* Just state how or what action to take
* Rely on insight to develop vision for the future
* Envision without the need for tangible support

Introverted Intuiting's verbal communications are delivered in absolutes with a quest for meaning, i.e.:

* "Why?"
* Identifying the hidden meaning
* States what is going on behind the scenes

Introverted Intuiting's nonverbal cues are: reflective, serious, and confident; may appear complex, disengaged; could appear hesitant to respond.

To build rapport with introverted Intuiting, we can try:

* Providing a theoretical framework
* Using symbolic, conceptual language
* Relating concrete experience to theories
* Asking them to show you how they made their connections
* Asking for the long-term vision

Here are the sorts of complaints we make about introverted Intuiting when we feel uncomfortable. We say the person is:

* Serious and arrogant
* Complex and vague
* Theoretical or lacking specifics
* Inflexible and adversarial
* Out of touch with reality



Extraverted iNtuiting (Ne)

* Inferring
* Hypothesizing
* Seeing possibilities
* Wondering and brainstorming
* Emergent

"This is what might be."
"It could be this or this or this or . . ."

When Ne is a preferred process:

* Much reading "between the lines" occurs.
* Potential possibilities and meanings are "revealed" and must be explored.
* You feel fully engaged in emerging new approaches to doing things and are energized by discovering other perspectives in an ever-shifting succession of ideas or insights triggered by the particular situation, much like brainstorming.
* You frequently experience a flight of ideas that brings relevant pieces of information from one context into another.
* "What is" is not seen for what it is but for its relationship to other things.
* Everything is perceived in a context of a web of relationships. Nothing stands alone or is disconnected.

Extraverted Intuiting is about Seeking Patterns and Possibilities

It focuses on:

* Possibilities for the future
* Identifying connections and patterns within the data
* Connecting the current situation with other possible situations -- what could be

Its approach is to:

* Propose options
* Respond enthusiastically to the ideas of others
* Get excited about doing something differently

Extraverted Intuiting's verbal communications are delivered through possibilities, i.e.:

* "We could do this, or maybe that"
* Connects the dots without drawing the lines
* Rapid delivery following stream-of-consciousness thought

Extraverted Intuiting's nonverbal cues are: energetic, excited, enthusiastic; bounces easily from one topic to another; enjoys the rush of something new.

To build rapport with extraverted Intuiting, we can try:

* Presenting the big picture first
* Remaining open to new ideas
* Providing opportunities to brainstorm alternatives
* Allowing room to explore options without judgment
* Avoiding the need for accurate details

Here are the sorts of complaints we make about extraverted Intuiting when we feel uncomfortable. We say it's:

* Lacking in follow-through
* Random, flighty, and chaotic
* Too comfortable with inaccurate specifics and detail
* Disrespectful of traditional approaches
* Overly optimistic and enthusiastic

 

[Fluffywolf]

 

[Little Linguist]

^^^ This is also awesome. Couldn't agree more. Ne is definitely a dominant or at LEAST an auxiliary (probably dominant) function of mine....(I mean what Jaguar said, although the picture is pretty awesome too!!!)