What is Ni?

[Triglav]

I think you're an INTP simply because you're questioning it.

What led you to believe that you were an INTP in the first place?

Are INTPs more prone to self-doubt than INTJs, is that what you are implying?

 

[Two Point Two]

That 'why didn't anybody tell me' video is, I think, quite a good example of Ni. Elements of it are remarkably close to how reality seems to me.

I also think Jaguar's descriptions are very good.

I think you're an INTP simply because you're questioning it.

I still don't get this.

INTJs may be confident with their concepts, but it is still possible for them to doubt a conclusion, and it's possible for them to question their type. INTPs may do it more often, but this is hardly an absolute decider.

Nevertheless, this

What led you to believe that you were an INTP in the first place?

Is still a good question.

 

[Triglav]

What led me to believe that I am an INTP was my test results and type description, although many INTJ and ENTP and even INFJ type description describe me accurately as well.

 

[Tyrant]

If you had no idea what Ni was, you should really question your type, go back, and study the cognitive functions.

 

[epp]

now... I know it was another thread, but I still can't see why it is suggested in that "why there can't be borderline P/J" that Ni and Ne are supposed to be somewhat opposites and cannot be used by the same person?

I definitely use both - and very much so. not at the same time, of course, as these are quite different processes, but still... now I'm confused and I don't like it one bit!

 

[the state i am in]

bc the whole system that emerges out of your pre-dominant perceptual mode makes no sense if you take away this facet of perception.

cascadeco and jaguar pretty much covered the differences from a conceptual and a more behaviorial process. i think of Ni as cascadeco says, Ni is interpolation internally and Ne is extrapolation externally. Ne intelligence is stored outside of itself, the ability to overlay, superimpose objects, branch, recognize possibilities, infer, etc. Ni symbolizes everything internally, synthesizes, rotates and processes and sifts details. the intelligence of the imagination worn on the outside when merged with the environment vs worn on the inside in the world of symbolic representation (read: language systems).

we take the relationships inward and then walk along them internally in a super up close zoomed in detailed way. we lose track of the big picture bc we are soooooo focused on intricate relationships and how we can better intergrate them, adjust them, recognize their interconnections, potential meanings, etc. Ne is the opposite, it zooms into the relationships around it and uses all the information to get the flow, feel where the energy is moving, locate the basic pattern and pick up on it before it gets there. it is so anticipatory, it merges with the environment, imagines the possible directions of movement, expansion, and creation from any perceptual CENTER (not object).

Ne would get how to play the game, would imagine what it would feel like to be any PARTICULAR play in the game. Ni would imagine the whole SINGULARITY of the game itself.

Ti sometimes looks like Ni bc Ti painstakingly reorders everything into one single strand of causal chain that becomes singular when it keeps spiraling forever.

 

[Wonkavision]

bc the whole system that emerges out of your pre-dominant perceptual mode makes no sense if you take away this facet of perception.

cascadeco and jaguar pretty much covered the differences from a conceptual and a more behaviorial process. i think of Ni as cascadeco says, Ni is interpolation internally and Ne is extrapolation externally. Ne intelligence is stored outside of itself, the ability to overlay, superimpose objects, branch, recognize possibilities, infer, etc. Ni symbolizes everything internally, synthesizes, rotates and processes and sifts details. the intelligence of the imagination worn on the outside when merged with the environment vs worn on the inside in the world of symbolic representation (read: language systems).

we take the relationships inward and then walk along them internally in a super up close zoomed in detailed way. we lose track of the big picture bc we are soooooo focused on intricate relationships and how we can better intergrate them, adjust them, recognize their interconnections, potential meanings, etc. Ne is the opposite, it zooms into the relationships around it and uses all the information to get the flow, feel where the energy is moving, locate the basic pattern and pick up on it before it gets there. it is so anticipatory, it merges with the environment, imagines the possible directions of movement, expansion, and creation from any perceptual CENTER (not object).

Ne would get how to play the game, would imagine what it would feel like to be any PARTICULAR play in the game. Ni would imagine the whole SINGULARITY of the game itself.

Ti sometimes looks like Ni bc Ti painstakingly reorders everything into one single strand of causal chain that becomes singular when it keeps spiraling forever.

WOW!!!

What an incredible post.

I love those descriptions.

 

[Two Point Two]

Ni symbolizes everything internally, synthesizes, rotates and processes and sifts details. the intelligence of the imagination worn on the outside when merged with the environment vs worn on the inside in the world of symbolic representation (read: language systems).

Do you mean to suggest that Ni must always be linguistic in nature? Because if so, I would have to disagree vehemently.

we take the relationships inward and then walk along them internally in a super up close zoomed in detailed way. we lose track of the big picture bc we are soooooo focused on intricate relationships and how we can better intergrate them, adjust them, recognize their interconnections, potential meanings, etc.

This can happen, but I don't find it to be an inescapable aspect of Ni. I think Ni is capable of manipulating and conceiving of connected concepts at the broader scale, too.

 

[the state i am in]

Do you mean to suggest that Ni must always be linguistic in nature? Because if so, I would have to disagree vehemently.

i think you have a clarification brewing that i do not see. please show it.

This can happen, but I don't find it to be an inescapable aspect of Ni. I think Ni is capable of manipulating and conceiving of connected concepts at the broader scale, too.

it finds the most correct available map so it can travel closely and trace all of its interconnections, remembering and re-absorbing them, to give birth to a bigger newly synthesized idea, no?

 

[Two Point Two]

i think you have a clarification brewing that i do not see. please show it.

You said that "the intelligence of the imagination...worn on the inside in the world of symbolic representation (read: language systems)."

I wanted to know if you meant by this that Ni always involved linguistic systems, if it was inherently lingusitic. Did you?

it finds the most correct available map so it can travel closely and trace all of its interconnections, remembering and re-absorbing them, to give birth to a bigger newly synthesized idea, no?

...Maybe. I'm having a little trouble relating to this description. The only point I was questioning was that Ni loses itself in the details, forgetting the bigger picture. I think this can occur but that it needn't necessarily.

 

[the state i am in]

You said that "the intelligence of the imagination...worn on the inside in the world of symbolic representation (read: language systems)."

I wanted to know if you meant by this that Ni always involved linguistic systems, if it was inherently lingusitic. Did you?

...Maybe. I'm having a little trouble relating to this description. The only point I was questioning was that Ni loses itself in the details, forgetting the bigger picture. I think this can occur but that it needn't necessarily.

language systems could be more broadly conceived? symbolic representations and tools to access, arrange, and sketch them into an internal mapping? i think Ni is best when it uses linguistic tools of which i include logic and mathematics and other systems used to understand and map out symbolic relationships. what else provides structure to that which has been abstracted internally and divorced from the actual materials that have given birth to it? language systems of broadly painted metaphorical relationships divorced from the games in which they have originated.

my idea of Ni is that we do intense detail-work to revise and re-sketch our internal vision of the way the world works. it is a metaphysical system. the ability of our Ni depends on its accuracy which is nothing but the fit between our sketched maps of the world's essence and what the world actually is/is becoming. providing more revised structure and more closely attuned detail is what gives our Ni space more reality, more perceptiveness, more open-ended clarity of insight, of symbolic manipulation and essence extraction and linguistic pattern-recognition. of interpolative conceptual abstraction, in short.

Ne is different because it goes in the opposite direction, is skilled in the materialization of conceptual seeds and can see the path in fast-forward to actualization like a quick and to-the-point highlight video.

 

[Two Point Two]

language systems could be more broadly conceived? symbolic representations and tools to access, arrange, and sketch them into an internal mapping? i think Ni is best when it uses linguistic tools of which i include logic and mathematics and other systems used to understand and map out symbolic relationships.

Symbollic representations, yes. But these need not be linguistic, even if 'linguistic' is conceived as including mathematics and logic. It need not be a 'system' that has any external manifestations at all.

what else provides structure to that which has been abstracted internally and divorced from the actual materials that have given birth to it?

For me, it's mostly imagery. Language suggests meaning only by invoking images; images suggest meaning more directly, and meaning itself - concept - is what Ni is primarily concerned with. This is still symbollic, but I hesitate to call it linguistic because it's automatic, innate and idiosyncratic (so far as I can tell).

my idea of Ni is that we do intense detail-work to revise and re-sketch our internal vision of the way the world works. it is a metaphysical system.

Ok, but it's not all detailed, is it? You can be focused entirely on one part of one theory, but you can also conceive of the whole, the way the parts of the theory fall in together.

it is a metaphysical system.

Agreed.

the ability of our Ni depends on its accuracy which is nothing but the fit between our sketched maps of the world's essence and what the world actually is/is becoming. providing more revised structure and more closely attuned detail is what gives our Ni space more reality, more perceptiveness, more open-ended clarity of insight, of symbolic manipulation and essence extraction and linguistic pattern-recognition. of interpolative conceptual abstraction, in short.

Revised structure, yes, but not necessarily in a higher degree of detail. Revising structure need also not be about getting it to map more closely with what is, but may be about restructuring so as to conceive of the same thing in a different way, thereby allowing you to realise not what reality is, but what reality isn't, though it may have seemed obviously to be so.

But I won't push the point any further; I feel as though we may be describing one thing in the context of slightly different interpretations, or simply utilising Ni slightly differently from one another.

 

[The Outsider]

Ne is different because it goes in the opposite direction, is skilled in the materialization of conceptual seeds and can see the path in fast-forward to actualization like a quick and to-the-point highlight video.

This is not correct. At least not in my case.

 

[Ginkgo]

I think you're an INTP simply because you're questioning it.

What led you to believe that you were an INTP in the first place?

I can't believe I made this post. Flattened by irony.

 

[Thisica]

1. This video is awesome.

2. I agree that it's a good example of Ni.

3. Yeah, I'm thinking he's INTJ.


I have a lot of questions about this, too, but I'm having trouble formulating them.

The video exactly conveys my sentiments! For me, Ni's a way of showing that the world is beyond the human imagination. Hence these mixed feelings of awe, also in conjunction with Fi and Te, for the knowledge that justifies the Ni atmospherics.

BTW, I've also had a thread about this topic, a few weeks ago.

 

[Jaguar]

I can't believe I made this post. Flattened by irony.

I have to admit, that old post of yours was lame.

 

[Ginkgo]

I have to admit, that old post of yours was lame.

Lamo the Clown.