Ni vs Fi (and Ti)

[gromit]

So I am making a new thread out of some of the comments from here, since I think they warrant their own topic, and maybe being placed in the MBTI (tm) and other personality matrices forum as well.

Interesting… part of the conversation we were having at the NE meetup was about Ti vs Ni. My understanding based off of our discussion is that Ni is more about these sort of axioms that are then compared with reality, almost an internal model of the universe that is adjusted as more information comes along, while Ti is more about logical consistency when evaluating something, like whether things relate to one another in a coherent fashion.

But then Fi seems similar to Ni in some ways too though, like the topic of this thread suggests, because I’ve heard people refer to Fi 'axioms'. But these axioms seem more like moral principles than a theoretical model of reality.

>Ni is more about these sort of axioms that are then compared with reality, almost an internal model of the universe that is adjusted as more information comes along

Great way of putting it. I came to think of them as what I called "event templates", which can be picked up in ongoing events, giving you a sense of what might/will happen.

Since this template or axiom is internal (not directly connected to the object you are looking at), that is why it is introverted. Since it's abstract (not some concrete rememberance, but rather a general pattern extracted from them), that's why it's intuition. Since it is perception, that is what separates it from Ti or Fi.

Where Ti is about logical consistency, and Fe about ethical congruence, those both move one to actually put things together, or evaluate how they should be put together. Ni is not about such putting together in terms of consistency; it is observing what already seems put together, as it is. Si is of course that way as well.

Yeah, but I noticed that Ni and Fi were the hardest to fully understand, followed by Ti. That's partly from them all being internal, and it's harder to come up with analogies (which are usually external), or understand ones we cannot relate tp our own internal experience. Si is the easiest introverted function to understand, because it is concrete, and often concerns memory.

Also, there was a lot of obfuscation of the concepts from certain sources, like Fi being any form of "valuation" or emotion, and even a person's Ti could be accused of really being Fi because they're too emotional about it, or not fitting a stereotypical TP "totally detached" mold. This led to many NP's being torn between T and F, and observers claiming any such people must be F's; when in reality, they might more likely be T's misled by the whole "always detached" stereotype.
I once had Ti described in terms of "knowing" or "getting things" quickly, which to me sounded more like Ni. And then, of course, the confusion concerning the word "feeling" used for both Fi and Ni; as mentioned.
Both Ti and Ni are also associated with "frameworks". But really, that's a quality of all introverted functions, if you really look at it.

Thanks! So Fi axioms deal with valuation of ideas and actions and attitudes. Ni, on the other hand, does not have valuation attached to it?

 

[Andy]

I like the last of your quotes best. This discusion reminds me of some thoughts I was having about the nature of the introverted perceiving functions. IJs have their extroverted percieving in the inferior position, which led me to wonder how we where ever supposed to learn anything about the real world. After awhile it occured to me that we do have another source of information, though it is not one that you might expect -the extroverted judging functions. All the extroverted functions are ways of relating to the outside world. The extroverted judging functions propel the user to define some goal and then seek to forefil it.

Of course, while the person is following this Je drive, they are also experiencing the world, even if they appear to just be trying to reach some objective. That's where Pi comes in. It's often hard to see, as introverted functions usually are, but Pi is working away in the background going over and assesing these experiences.

That's a big part of what the introverted percieving functions do - they act as an internal check on what you are doing and why you are doing it. They seek answers to these questions, but they do not pass sentance over them - that's the job of the judging functions. Pi just ferrets out the answer, then passes it along. The judging functions then utilise the information in there own way. Je looks for applications and consequences, Ji evaluates it's worth. How much the person values these judgements depends upon where Ji and Je appear in the function order.

This focus on what and why also explains how Pi lends itself so "temporal information gathering", by which I mean thinking ahead or looking back. When you understand "what and Why" predicting things becomes easier.

The main differance between Ni and Si is how they go about the task.

 

[Eric B]

Thanks! So Fi axioms deal with valuation of ideas and actions and attitudes. Ni, on the other hand, does not have valuation attached to it?

Not really; "valuation" is another word for "judgment", and Ni is of course perception. (Loosely, all functions are referred to in terms of "valuation" sometimes, but strictly speaking judgment is valuation).