How Good Is Sim's Ni Definition?

[Zarathustra]

What a verbose rebuttal, lemme get out the thesaurus to come up with my rebut. :rolli:

Brevity is wit.

 

[uumlau]

But surely you appreciate the fact that remaining silent allows others to misjudge the extent of your knowledge, whether or not that is your primary goal? It's definitely a useful side effect.

It's a useful but entirely accidental side effect. My main point is that INTJs tend not to go "blah blah blah" unless you hit their "pontificate" button, at which point they go all Te and tell you everything you never wanted to know.

You don't think most INTJs want the upper hand? Are you saying I'm incorrect in the belief that most NTJs enjoy feeling powerful and influential?

Not in the sense you might think. We want to feel secure. Some can indeed overreact to their insecurity, and play "power games," but such power is entirely different from that which is based on Fe.

I've had other INTJs, ones with whom I am close enough to trust, explain it to me that way explicitly before. I guess this varies from INTJ to INTJ.

...

I think my mistake here has been assuming that different INTJs think too similarly to each other.

I believe you, but such is usually post-facto rationalization. We naturally tend to not speak much. That some INTJs "take advantage" of that is mostly posturing, in my opinion.

One thing I've noticed is that while INTJs appear to grab for power and advantage, it's really a desire for efficiency and self perfection. Most INTJs are ignorant of the Fe-style power games and how they work.

I have, in the past, often found myself accused of such shenanigans, and my reaction has always been, "WTF?!" That I don't find myself accused of such very often now is a reflection of my having figured out over the years the various communication problems and adjusting my replies to avoid them. Even now, if I leave off various disclaimers in an effort to be more eloquent and precise (in my own opinion), I find myself having to write a post or three to clean up the mess.

I suspect that you have far better developed and far more influential Fi than most INTJs. I think most of them are far more secretive, far more aware of the strategic value in withholding information, and far less emotionally intelligent than you are.

I don't find this very convincing. The "strategy" - such as it is - is accidental. We really don't know what to "do" with our "secret information" in Fe terms.

In the long run, if we develop a reputation for being knowledgeable and intelligent, it's because we are, not because we play games and hide our lack of understanding.

2.) A very close INTJ friend of mine recently asked me if I read "Stranger in a Strange Land", no I haven't but the title intrigues me... a lot.

You'll enjoy it. It's right up your alley.

3.) NOT ALL INTJS ARE THE SAME.

3a.) As in, some are more healthy than others, some are SIGNIFICANTLY smarter than others, some are more INTROVERTED than others.

Of course.

4.) You don't see yourself well, you're definitely a weirdo. , and I could imagine how an average person would perceive you, lol! But you are RIDICULOUSLY INTELLIGENT, and you exhibit a BUTTLOAD of Ni Te and Fi. Most INTJs on this site just don't compare to you, I know some who do, but they are still young.

Your forgot the Se ...
*twirls SS across the dance floor*

5.) I wish Zara was more like you sometimes...... oh well.

He'll be better than me. These things take time.

6.) I wonder how life experience, circumstance, AND GENETIC predispositions, i.e. intelligence, introvertedness, etc. affect the INTJ.

A lot. In general, however, with respect to Sim's analysis, I find that I get the best results by assuming that other people are generally reasonable and feel goodwill towards others. Assuming that INTJs are playing power games with information is a bad assumptions, in my opinion. If you're feeling bad vibes from an INTJ, it's because you simply don't exist in his universe, not because he's trying to game you somehow.

uumlau has the advantage of age.

Careful: I might return the compliment, such as it is.

I too relish uumlau's posts, but it's wise not to place him or anyone on a pedestal. I doubt he would enjoy being there.

I -am- an introvert, after all.

It's kind of funny, though: I was at the dance studio for a private lesson, in the small room that allows a lesson to be really private (usually it's on the big dance floor with all the other private lessons, due to space limitations). I ended up getting kicked out, because another student had expressed an extreme degree of shyness, and the studio manager said, "No way that <uumlau> is shy."

BINGO!!!!!!!

Uumlau excluding, and some other INTJs, but you just hit the nail on the head muthafucka!!!!

Et tu, Silly?

I've witnessed/observed this first hand with one INTJ in particular, and I find it pathetic, lacking of integrity and loathsome!

UGH!!!

But, seriously sim, bravo, someone with da Ne-Ti skillz needed to drop this TRUTH BOMB!

I suggest you look at the situation again. Some INTJs actually are that truly loathsome, but in my experience, being stuck in their heads explains 90% of the assholey behavior.

 

[Glycerine]

To Silly, I will do most things for people AS LONG as the costs to me don't outweigh the benefits to the recipient. For example, I wouldn't just give $10,000 to help out just anyone (except a charity). The person NEEDS to show that they really need the money and I would have to have that much to give out.

 

[sculpting]

6.) I wonder how life experience, circumstance, AND GENETIC predispositions, i.e. intelligence, introvertedness, etc. affect the INTJ.

I would be very interested in parent MBTI types. Baby INTJs build Te rulesets of behaviors starting very, very young. Thus they will mimic what they see. U's mom was an INFJ...note his very different tone even from the other older INTJs here, such as Highlander.

My INTJ exdad-in-law is much harsher. His motto is "If you are gonna be dumb, you'd better be tough". He is pretty stoic and very often rolls his eyes to the ceiling at the utter stupidity of the world-then carries onwards. His mom was an ESTP, and brother is an ISTP. His wife is an ISTP and they had two STP kids. There is little mercy given during the holidays. The weakest perish...

My INTJs (N=5) I work with are all older and dont seem to be planning to take over the world. They dont even really seek power. The one who just became a VP had to drug to meetings by the ENTP, as he wanted her to be "seen" as a player. She sat by me in the back At my christmas party all the INTJs ended up at my table in the back of the room with NFP spouses and avoided the social niceties.

The INTJs are arrogant, obnoxious, socially avoidant and rude. But they are COMPETENT! Oh, thank god are they competent. It is at the point that people are gravitating to the groups where the INTJs are leaders, even if the project is an abysmal pit of hell, as they have faith in the ability of the INTJ to figure stuff out.

I would killpeople for the lady i mentioned above, as I trust there would likely be a good reason. Or work 80 hour weeks, or actually use more than 5% of my brain....as I would know my efforts would not be wasted and we would accomplish things...

I too relish uumlau's posts, but it's wise not to place him or anyone on a pedestal. I doubt he would enjoy being there.

Oh, dear I was sorta veering in the opposite direction and going to start an uumlau cult.... doesnt mean he is always right though.... U!

 

[highlander]

Reading through this thread and thinking about it, it seems like the following two things might be at work:
1. Sim's tertiary Fe reacting to Te and that he doesn't like Te projecting its values on him.
2. Ni vs Ne conflict - which I'm not sure I've thought about much before. It definitely seems to be there though.

While I find some of his words to be a bit extreme, the point about imposing a value system on others is no doubt quite valid as is the fact that other types may be quite annoyed by it. I'm certain that I've been guilty of this in the past.

You're right; some NTJs really do consistently piss me off. It's not that they have a preset way of assigning value to things; everyone has that, it's that coupled with the way many of them assume that their value system is The Correct Value Systemâ„¢, end of story, because everyone else is too stupid to understand the REAL truth the way only NTJs do.

When you introduce typology to these types, their response tends to be not, "Oh, I see now that there are lots of different value systems and none is any better than any other", but rather, "Oh, now I get it--NTJs are the smart people! Now I can explain why everyone who doesn't think like me is a total ingrate moron!" (*cough* Lex Tali-tard *cough*)

Rather than use it as a way to recognize the subjectivity of their own perspectives, as it's intended, they just use it to bolster their own delusional arrogance and reinforce the idea that their value system is objectively better than everyone's. It's pretty sickening.

Honestly dude you are way smarter than most NTJs I've come across--it's just that no type group is ever as consistently arrogant about its intelligence and perceptive abilities as NTJs, which drives me up the fucking wall because so many of you are simultaneously mired in perceptual bias yet arrogantly obsessed with the fantasy that you're immune to it.

It's infuriating.

And... how exactly are you applying this knowledge other than lambasting Te users? Most of your posts in this thread are devoted to somehow expose Te users for "the greedy utilitarians" they are without actually understanding that perspective. And you want to know why? Because you're not those people, regardless of what type they are.

Please stop attaching hostility to my words when none exists. My point was quite obviously that in some situations Te is vastly preferable to Ti, because sometimes breadth is more important than depth. It's all context-dependent.

I don't know what the hell you're talking about, and you haven't done this bad a job interpreting my posts in the entire time I've been interacting with you.

My ongoing point throughout the whole thread has been that no function is fundamentally superior to any other, and that both introversion and extroversion are important aspects of a healthy individual. EACH PERSPECTIVE IS PREFERABLE IN DIFFERENT SITUATIONS. NEITHER IS FUNDAMENTALLY SUPERIOR.

NeTe is for play - just in isolation, it is like solving a puzzle. Sometimes however their is a very real Fi need to solve a puzzle...thus Fi determines the orientation of the ship-but then to be able to step away from certain aspects of Fi as they will prevent an objective evaluation of the problem. (Fe does the same thing...note Sim attacking the INTJs in the thread. They offend him morally and this offense introduces flaws in his logical analysis)

Temperament Part 2: The MBTI's 16 types and Cognitive Functions

Embedded in EricB's link:

Achilles Tendencies, the Essay

One piece of text:

"FJs, who extravert Feeling, are the most empathetic types. More than the other types, they tend to project inwardly, into themselves the values, standards, and concerns of other people. They experience those values, etc., as though they were their own, and they judge their own actions and character on the basis of those internalized values. TJs, who extravert Thinking, are the most directive types. More than the other types, they tend to project outwardly, into others their own values, standards, and concerns. They experience those values, etc., as though they belonged to other people, and they judge the actions and character of others on the basis of their own externalized values.

Despite these clear differences, there is an overall similarity between all eight J types. Whether empathetic or directive, they are all relatively more likely to be projecting values into someone than are the eight P types. P types, on the other hand, all extravert an impersonal Perceiving function, either iNtuition or Sensing. By thus using their Judging function in an introverted way, they disengage or detach it from their dealings with the world. As a result, P types tend to spend less time and energy imposing their values onto others, or taking the values of others into themselves, than do J types."

 

[highlander]

I've read somewhere that INTJs have a tendency to be very secretive, and to hold back, is this true? Why do you think that is?

No. They're secretive because they recognize the strategic value in withholding information. If they talk too much they give away how much they know or don't know; if they say nothing and simply let others assume from their silence that they know everything, they never have to reveal exactly how much they do or don't know, which leaves them with the upper hand. That way they know more about how much you know than you know about how much they know (phew!)

They've just very cognizant of not giving away more information than strategically necessary. They like to be one step ahead of everyone.

This, I think, is one of the biggest reasons INTJs dislike sharing their deepest feelings and ideas with extroverts, especially EPs. They don't want the whole world to hear about it!

The problem with Sim's stereotypes is that there are always grains of truth. It's the same with the Ni definition - much of it is right. It's just that the picture that's described is not always a balanced view IMO.

I'd split this up into two areas.

World of Work

INTJs might ascribe to the motto, "better to say nothing and be thought a fool than open your mouth and erase all doubt." Remember, they do have rather high standards and like to be competent. So, they aren't likely to blather on if they haven't thought things through.

Have I ever not opened up at work because I was concerned that an EP would reveal things to the world or because withholding information provided some strategic advantage? You bet. Is that the way I operate 98% of the time? Absolutely not. Other types are far more "political" in this regard. That being said, I'm sure there are INTJs that do this commonly, just as I'm equally sure there are ESTJs, ISTJs, and ENTJs that do the same. You'd be a fool not to realize this kind of stuff goes on.

Personal Relationships

Introverts are not going to open up as much in general. If I think about several types I know - INFP, ISFJ, ISTJ, etc. they are not as revealing of their emotions and feelings as extroverts are. It's not because they're trying to keep some kind of secret. It's who they are.

For an INTJs specifically, I think there may be a few factors at play:
- They may not be as aware of their emotions as other types; how they feel and why they feel a certain way.
- They're tough on the outside but sensitive on the inside with those who they have a close relationship with. There may be a fear of being vulnerable and since the INTJ is more likely than others to "fortify the castle" this might result in all types of behaviors to avoid being hurt. In any significant relationship, safety is an important thing for intimacy to exist.
- They may have a tough time articulating verbally what's going on inside.
- They need a certain level of independence which can be interpreted by others as separating themselves off.

The other thought I had is that in terms of the differences between different types of INTJs, and motivations, Enneagram might help.

 

[gromit]

This thread is exhausting...

 

[Wonkavision]

The problem with Sim's stereotypes is that there are always grains of truth. It's the same with the Ni definition - much of it is right. It's just that the picture that's described is not always a balanced view IMO.

Yeah.

Basically, Sim has a habit of stating things in an unkind and occasionally unbalanced way--but more often than not, I agree with the gist of what he's saying.

Of course, like him, I am a generalist.

Obviously, some people care more about precision and depth than accessibility and breadth.

To each his own.

 

[highlander]

This thread is exhausting...

Haha. I just caught up tonight. I've been working.

Not exactly a focused discussion I suppose.

 

[Night]

Not in the sense you might think. We want to feel secure. Some can indeed overreact to their insecurity, and play "power games," but such power is entirely different from that which is based on Fe.

I just wanted to take a second and magnify this particular sentiment, uumlau, because I think you're spot-on here.

I hate to develop a "my experience" statement, but it really is my experience that INTJs often feel some form of personal inadequacy at the relative unpredictability of the rest of the world. A lack of determinable form, maybe. Like a Kandinsky piece; an array of color and geometry outside the discernible reach of our intellectual fingertips - unless - adequately measured and cataloged. A psychological airbag.

The specific rationale for this "safety-netting" is relative to the user.

My security issues stem from a lack of financial stability when I was a kid. Moved around a lot and rarely had enough time to cultivate and maintain long-term relationships. As a result, I was forced into the social periphery. Spent a lot of time alone. Resolved to work hard enough to avoid exposing my children to the same kind of erratic behavior. Any pursuit of "power" serves this fundamental goal.

As such, my determination at work is often confused for a sense of misguided superiority. Or untoward ambition.

Truth is, I'm just focused. I want to work hard now to avoid what happened before.

 

[highlander]

I hate to develop a "my experience" statement, but it really is my experience that INTJs often feel some form of personal inadequacy at the relative unpredictability of the rest of the world. A lack of determinable form, maybe. Like a Kandinsky piece; an array of color and geometry outside the discernible reach of our intellectual fingertips - unless - adequately measured and cataloged. A psychological airbag.

The specific rationale for this "safety-netting" is relative to the user; it's tough enough to pinpoint a shared psychological characteristic without oversimplifying, so I hope you forgive me for waxing anecdotal at this point.

My security issues stem from a lack of financial stability when I was a kid. Moved around a lot and rarely had enough time to cultivate and maintain long-term relationships. As a result, I was forced into the social periphery. Spent a lot of time alone. Resolved to work hard enough to avoid exposing my children to the same kind of erratic behavior. Any pursuit of "power" serves this fundamental goal.

As such, my determination at work is often confused for a sense of misguided superiority. Or untoward ambition.

Truth is, I'm just focused. I want to work hard now to avoid what happened before.

It's good you know your motivations.

I've always been driven by a strong need for financial independence. I recall having this drive from a very young age and don't even remember where it came from or why. It is absolutely a "security" thing. I don't want to have to worry about money. So, looking at Sim's original list of "value" items, wealth has always been high on my list, though never at the top. I started with nothing.

Really, we should probably think these things through more. Focus is great but we need to make sure that we have the right goals in mind. Money, influence, power - none of these things brings true happiness. It is easier to be happy if you have money than to be happy without it but once you hit a certain threshold, I'm not sure it matters.

 

[Kalach]

*judges you all... maintains edge*


Ni, specifically, is supposed to be able to find the connection that others can't. It's supposed to be that Ni creates knowledge as opposed to discovering it from outside. The distinction is slim, and is a perceived difference based on Ni being introverted--it perceives itself to be independent of the outside world. An Ni user will understand himself to be manipulating or synthesizing connections, finding what wasn't there before. How does it achieve this? I don't know, but frameworks and models and archetypes are... well, Jung said that's what we're about, but where's the creativity?

Introverted functions are cut off, deliberately, from external checks. There is some reality checking involved, but too much of that kind of nonsense, ironically, leads one astray--we map too closely to the real world and don't see the rest of what's there to see.

 

[burymecloser]

I know this part of the discussion seemed to wrap up a couple days ago, and I hate to return to a potentially contentious issue, but I'm very interested in Sim's assertions about intro/extraversion and depth vs. breadth.

The preference for precision that he associates with introversion, I always thought was simply Ti. Is this about Te/Ti, E/I, or (Fe,Ne,Se,Te)/(Fi,Ni,Si,Ti)?

The only things that are 100% certain are tautologies. In order to accept that 2+2=4, we first must accept a common definition of the terms "2", "+", "=", and "4" which defines 2+2 as 4 in the first place.

So yes, if we accept the rules of mathematics as defined by human culture, then it's objectively true that 2+2=4. But that's a meaningless tautology--"If we accept a system that necessitates two plus two being four, then it's absolutely true that two plus two is four." Do you see why this is a meaningless distinction?

I see what you're saying, but I see absolutely no value in it. What possible reason is there not to accept the basic premises of mathematics? It can be interesting and illuminating to consider discrete approaches, but rejecting "the rules of mathematics as defined by human culture" forces us to close ourselves off from vast areas of knowledge. Wouldn't outright denial of those standards constitute insanity? How could one who rejected them function on a day-to-day basis?

Not to get too circular with this thing, but I guess what I'm arguing is that certain premises -- such as the "system that necessitates two plus two being four" -- are themselves objective and inarguable.

Any "absolute truth" requires some sort of arbitrary assumption to build from.

I'm not sure I follow you here. What's arbitrary about the laws of mathematics?

Moreover, isn't there a possibility that imprecision or expediency in a description could lead the audience to misunderstand that subject, regardless of whether the topic is objective or subjective?

Sure. What's your point?

I guess it raises the question of what one's goal is in making that description public. It's the principle of "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing" -- if a poorly expressed idea reaches a large audience, mightn't its effect actually be the opposite of what the author intended? Don't you risk spreading the wrong idea if its expression reaches an extreme of imprecision? And if so, isn't that counter-productive?

I'm not arguing for unlimited precision and perfectionism -- I wasn't really arguing for anything, just asking a question -- but isn't it in the author/speaker/whoever's interests that her/his audience attain some minimal level of understanding? I guess what I'm really asking is: aren't there limits on the utility of quantity at the expense of quality, just as there are limits on the utility of quality at the expense of quantity? This seems obvious to me; I don't feel like acknowledging those limits is a function of introversion or extraversion.

Isn't "sacrific[ing] precision in order to make the ideas more easily accessible to others" the same as sacrificing the quality of an idea for the quantity of its dissemination?

Yes, it's precisely the same. Introversion chooses quality; extroversion chooses quantity. Now I want you to ask yourself why quality is inherently better than quantity.

Well, I'm not sure it is. I think ideally there's some sort of balance. Hypothetically, I'd expect there to be a point of diminishing returns beyond which depth > breadth becomes counterproductive -- and vice versa: if an idea is too poorly expressed or over-simplified, reaching a large audience is useless (or even outright counterproductive) because the intended message is not conveyed in a comprehensible manner.

From the extroverted perspective, quantity is preferable to quality because if we focus too much on quality we never actually apply our ideas to anything. We become obsessed with making them perfect and lose any and all realistic application in the process.

This is what intrigues me. I've always thought of E/I primarily in social terms, and your description reads to me like one of the differences between Te and Ti; it would really change my view of things if this were more generally applicable to intro/extraversion. Could you expand on this a little?

Also, I'd be interested in other opinions as well; extraverted Ti-users and introverted Te-users (I know there are several INTJs in this thread), does this resonate with you?

And isn't there a danger, by emphasising quantity over quality, that a lot of people would learn bad ideas, rather than a few people learning good ones?

What you've just asked effectively reduces to: "But isn't introversion clearly better than extroversion?"

I think you're reading between the lines. I meant my question literally, not trying to pass a particular judgment. Doesn't that risk exist, that at a certain point in the spectrum the quality of the idea expressed can be so far diluted as to be either useless or outright harmful?

 

[uumlau]

It's good you know your motivations.

I've always been driven by a strong need for financial independence. I recall having this drive from a very young age and don't even remember where it came from or why. It is absolutely a "security" thing. I don't want to have to worry about money. So, looking at Sim's original list of "value" items, wealth has always been high on my list, though never at the top. I started with nothing.

Really, we should probably think these things through more. Focus is great but we need to make sure that we have the right goals in mind. Money, influence, power - none of these things brings true happiness. It is easier to be happy if you have money than to be happy without it but once you hit a certain threshold, I'm not sure it matters.

I completely agree with this. A large part of my current feelings of "security" stem not from being "powerful" or "wealthy", but from living well below my means. When I was shopping for a house, one bank I spoke to wanted to loan me twice as much as I really wanted to spend. (This was 2005, so if you're wondering where the crash came from, here's a data point.)

In the end, I got the house I wanted, and my mortgage was substantially less than the rent I was paying previously. When the financially unstable times hit, I cut some unnecessary expenses, not because I couldn't "afford" them, but because I dislike spending money that I don't have to, for these self-same "security" reasons.

So I use my INTJ "superpowers" to figure out how best to manage all of this, and to my great surprise, I end up doing fairly well. But my actual attitude toward money is that I don't want to be bothered by it. I don't want to have to think about it. It annoys me. I make all of my bills autopay, and I just audit my finances every few months or so to make sure nothing is awry. My money strategy isn't to get rich, it's to arrange my finances so that they don't worry me, so that they aren't a source of insecurity. I'd rather be able to sit back and think about things that are fun to think about, than worry about the damn money.

 

[Zarathustra]

It is easier to be happy if you have money than to be happy without it but once you hit a certain threshold, I'm not sure it matters.

Have any of you (INTJs) actually put a figure to that threshold?

I have known my own for a very long time...

 

[simulatedworld]

I just wanted to take a second and magnify this particular sentiment, uumlau, because I think you're spot-on here.

I hate to develop a "my experience" statement, but it really is my experience that INTJs often feel some form of personal inadequacy at the relative unpredictability of the rest of the world. A lack of determinable form, maybe. Like a Kandinsky piece; an array of color and geometry outside the discernible reach of our intellectual fingertips - unless - adequately measured and cataloged. A psychological airbag.

The specific rationale for this "safety-netting" is relative to the user.

My security issues stem from a lack of financial stability when I was a kid. Moved around a lot and rarely had enough time to cultivate and maintain long-term relationships. As a result, I was forced into the social periphery. Spent a lot of time alone. Resolved to work hard enough to avoid exposing my children to the same kind of erratic behavior. Any pursuit of "power" serves this fundamental goal.

As such, my determination at work is often confused for a sense of misguided superiority. Or untoward ambition.

Truth is, I'm just focused. I want to work hard now to avoid what happened before.

Have you decided that you're INTJ now?

 

[sculpting]

It's good you know your motivations.

I've always been driven by a strong need for financial independence. I recall having this drive from a very young age and don't even remember where it came from or why. It is absolutely a "security" thing. I don't want to have to worry about money. So, looking at Sim's original list of "value" items, wealth has always been high on my list, though never at the top. I started with nothing.

Really, we should probably think these things through more. Focus is great but we need to make sure that we have the right goals in mind. Money, influence, power - none of these things brings true happiness. It is easier to be happy if you have money than to be happy without it but once you hit a certain threshold, I'm not sure it matters.

My dadinlaw was an INTJ raised poor, thus also was motivated strongly for financial independence. I grew up never knowing what city we would live in or how bills would get paid, thus, while i do not appreciate wealth for the sake of money or power...I appreciate financial independence. I recognize I have to provide that for myself and not rely on others.

Funny, my intj toddler yesterday insisted on buying his own toy. The toy is a weekly reward for practicing violin and being good at his lesson. But he had a pocket full of quarters and insisted on using them to pay for part of his toy. Then he told me "This is my toy and I bought it."

Also, with respect to this whole thread...it has been a great deal of fun...but I almost feel as though we never really heard the voice of the INFJs as they were drowned out by the NTP-NTJ discussion and the ENFP spirals. Only a few had a chance to speak up and I dont feel we captured their contribution adequately or fairly. Perhaps it would be of value to pose this same question in another thread but specifically request just the INFJs to give us their thoughts and feelings of how Ni works in their world? Just my 2c.

 

[entropie]

we dont ni'd no new definition...

ouh wrong thread

 

[onemoretime]

we dont ni'd no new definition...

ouh wrong thread

we don't ni'd no thought control?

 

[entropie]

Müller runs and he scores !!!!!!!! goaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaall

a cent per bad joke and we gonna be rich in notime