• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

How Good Is Sim's Ni Definition?

simulatedworld

Freshman Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2008
Messages
5,552
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
:laugh:

Well, I totally agree with the first two of those sentences.

But the thing about the Te description, and descriptions of any functions as sole and independent things, is that it completely leaves out how those functions interact with other functions, and the counterbalancing effects of those interactions.

I am by no means rigid in my plans; I like to make them, and then improvise and change them around like crazy.

Why? Because my Ni brings flexibility to my Te rigidity.

It's really impossible, or, more accurately, absurd to think of the functions independently and in isolation. It's a vacuum that doesn't exist.



Yeah, and we do so for the sake of accuracy...

Which is more important: the Ti user's model, or the truth?

:doh:


What was that you were saying about describing your dislike for the way users of each function interact with you rather than the function itself?

The problems with my understanding of Ni are matched only by yours of Ti. :doh:

I find it awfully ironic that an Ni dom is preaching about "the truth", though, as if such a thing actually exists independently of human perception.


P.S.,

Te is really, really, really imprecise and inaccurate. NTJs constantly make sloppy errors in logic. Remember, everything you find annoying about Ne overgeneralizing and sacrificing depth for the sake of broader applicability applies equally well to the way Ti users feel about Te.

Course, you don't need to listen to me, cause Ti is inferior anyway. (But I'm sure you know that, since you rock so hard at all four NT functions.) :rofl1:



The piece would have been better titled not "a description of Ni", but a description of Ni from an Ne-dom's perspective, or, better yet, a description of Ni from simulatedworld.

Indeed, judging from how terrible your general understanding of Ne/Ti is, I can only imagine how annoying hearing a non-Ni type describe your dominant function must be. :)



This fits. Everything after that is a non sequitur that describes how Ni might manifest in behaviors, rather than what Ni actually is. He's still anthropomorphizing the functions as if they are people, which is a strong indication that he's characterizing his experiences of those who predominately use Ni rather than talking about the functions themselves. In other words, he's stereotyping and not archetyping, which is a consequence of applied typology, and a cause of what SolitaryWalker calls "folk typology".

Unfortunately for SolitaryWalker, well-versed in Jungian typology though he may be, he lives in a giant Ti+Si loop and displays almost no Ne whatsoever.

He's actually quite similar to functianalyst from personalitycafe, an ISTP very heavily mired in Ti+Ni.

My use of such examples is a manifestation of Ne: I sacrifice precision in order to make the ideas more easily accessible to others.

That's the crux of an extroverted perspective: Breadth over depth. Choosing a perspective with a wide range of external applications necessitates that we give up some degree of perfect accuracy. When you're stuck in an I+I loop, you can't do that because you don't understand how breadth could ever be preferable to depth.

And yet, sometimes it is. "Folk typology" as defined by SolitaryWalker is basically, "Applying typology to anything real or useful or meaningful in the real external world outside one's own head."

Because doing so requires us to sacrifice some degree of depth and precision, to an ultra-introvert with no discernible E perspective, it's the cardinal sin.

And by that definition, I am very much a folk typologist. I actually like to relate my ideas to things outside my own head.

I wish there were more extroverts interested in this stuff, cause I get kinda tired of hearing the same tired introverted criticisms again and again. "BUT ZOMG WE DON'T HAVE ABSOLUTELY PERFECT 100% IMPECCABLE COMPLETE CERTAINTY!!!!!!!!! HOW CAN THIS BE USEFUL IN ANY WAY EVER AT ALL??????????" sigh.
 

Kalach

Filthy Apes!
Joined
Dec 3, 2008
Messages
4,310
MBTI Type
INTJ
I find it awfully ironic that an Ni dom is preaching about "the truth", though, as if such a thing actually exists independently of human perception.

All one needs is an extroverted thinking perspective and *shazaam*, truth will exist prior to perception.

Te is really, really, really imprecise and inaccurate. NTJs constantly make sloppy errors in logic.

Yep. It doesn't have to be, but yep. If their perception is up to scratch, they probably still have something workable.


It seems what people are supposed to do is own their own perspectives. It doesn't necessarily mean there'll be a whole lot of conversation between the types. There's always the weather I suppose. People can always talk about the weather.
 
G

Ginkgo

Guest
By making a platform to express simulatedworld's definition of functions, you give him an inordinate amount of recognition and attention. A large chunk of this forum contains "definitions" of functions as people interpret them and as those functions are already defined; yet they are dim and stifled by the flow of conversation.
 
G

Ginkgo

Guest
And yet, sometimes it is. "Folk typology" as defined by SolitaryWalker is basically, "Applying typology to anything real or useful or meaningful in the real external world outside one's own head."

It seems as though you are attempting to use typology as a means to analyze people's behavior. Since their behavior is abnormal to you, you jump to the conclusion that their opinions are void - like you responded to highlander by thrashing NTJs. (Contrary to what you have told me - "that by understanding typology, we can better appreciate other people's perspectives". All I see is depreciation. )

Since you are so willing to dismiss their opinions based on their performance, you evade evaluating the validity of your own statements, which is not a search for truth, but rather a search for finding ways to be critical of people.

If you are not keen on discovering the truth of typology, I'm really not sure why anyone would want to take your typologogical theories with anything but a grain of salt.
 
G

Ginkgo

Guest
My use of such examples is a manifestation of Ne: I sacrifice precision in order to make the ideas more easily accessible to others.

If an idea is not precise, then would this not prevent someone from accessing the truth of it? Forget Ne. This sacrifices the quality of an idea for the quantity of it's dissemination. In doing such a thing, you let bad ideas spread like wildfire instead of refining them and sharing them with a select few. Is it not possible to refine them and then spread them? Wouldn't that make them more appealing to some?

That's the crux of an extroverted perspective: Breadth over depth. Choosing a perspective with a wide range of external applications necessitates that we give up some degree of perfect accuracy. When you're stuck in an I+I loop, you can't do that because you don't understand how breadth could ever be preferable to depth.

No, it's not. Extraversion entails that one prefers external criteria over internal criteria. One may still have depth in external criteria, and one may still have breadth in internal criteria. Just because someone prefers external criteria does not mean that accuracy is mitigated. Accuracy of a statement depends upon the reasoning behind a statement, rather than the typology of the person making the statement.

I wish there were more extroverts interested in this stuff, cause I get kinda tired of hearing the same tired introverted criticisms again and again. "BUT ZOMG WE DON'T HAVE ABSOLUTELY PERFECT 100% IMPECCABLE COMPLETE CERTAINTY!!!!!!!!! HOW CAN THIS BE USEFUL IN ANY WAY EVER AT ALL??????????" sigh.

Why are you referring to these criticisms as introverted? A criticism is a judgement (using analysis and evaluation). Just because a criticism comes from an introverted person does not mean that it has an introverted quality about it. Nor does it mean that one should dismiss it because it makes them feel uncomfortable.
 
G

garbage

Guest
There sure are a lot of "well you can't possibly understand x because you're type y and so your z function is inferior" posts in this thread.

Because you're all apparently getting bored of that formula, though, you sometimes switch it up with "well, you would think that way! You're y!" And for your sense of diversity, I commend you.


Keep on truckin' guys. Truck, all of you.
 
S

Sniffles

Guest
Simuated World said:
Rather than imagine different ways we could change the outside world, Ni acknowledges many different ways we could change the subjective meaning of things to ourselves by looking at them from different angles. Rather than directly confront an issue, Ni will often solve problems by simply looking at them from a different angle. Doing a bunch of community service sucks? Just think of it as an opportunity to get lots of exercise! Note that Ni doesn't think about how to change the outer world the way Ne does; it only thinks about how to change *the way we interpret* the outer world. Ni leads you to try and see "through the smoke and mirrors" to what is REALLY going on below the surface, that other people are not perceptive enough to pick up on
This I can especially relate on many levels. I've often stated I'm more interested in pondering certain paradigms on how best to understand the world rather than necessarily go out and change it per se; cause if you have the best paradigm everything else falls into place. When Ne people say they want to change the world, I often ask them "yes but change towards what exactly?"

...so in its unhealthy form, it turns into conspiracy theories, a la Dale Gribble from King of the Hill.
That probably explains why he was one of my favorite TV characters. :laugh: It also explains why I sometimes have a certain empathy towards conspiracy theorists, but I often notice they rely upon half-truths and go wild with it. A wrong step in the right direction as one could say.


On a side note: Ni appreciates definitional freedom (and thus is often annoyed by Ti) in the same way Ne appreciates freedom to change its plan of action abruptly (and thus is often annoyed by Te.) Ti users will tend to frame debates by first assigning precise definitions to terms, but Ni often objects to this by wondering: "How are we unconsciously limiting our understanding by assigning such rigid definitions in the first place?" Ni always seeks to escape the unconscious assumptions that limit its understanding of as many different conceptual viewpoints as possible."

Yes I can relate to this too. I have nothing against Ti per se(I do use it alot), but the reliance on exact and precise definitions often irks me because alot of the subject matter under discussion are rather complex that defy that kind of definition - at least from my perspective. I also notice that Ti is more about analysis - ie breaking down concepts into smaller pieces and disecting them; while Ni tends to be more about I guess synthesis - trying to see how everything ties in together.
 

Jaguar

Active member
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
20,647
There sure are a lot of "well you can't possibly understand x because you're type y and so your z function is inferior" posts in this thread.

You just described a charlatan extraordinaire- one skilled in selling snake oil.
There are those who share knowledge to help others, and those who use it to push their own agenda.
Who they are, and which camp they fall into, is painfully obvious at any given moment.
 

SillySapienne

`~~Philosoflying~~`
Joined
Jan 14, 2008
Messages
9,801
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
4w5
Translation: NTJs think they're smarter than everyone/that everyone who doesn't approach life the way they do must be a moron, because there can't possibly be anything they missed about any other perspectives.
^ I've witnessed this firsthand. :/

Sorry, NTJs, but this is perhaps your Achilles heel.
 

cascadeco

New member
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
9,083
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
9w1
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
"Ni, or introverted iNtuition, is dominant for INxJ, secondary for ENxJ, tertiary for ISxP and inferior for ESxP. It is an inward sense of abstract perceptual shift. Rather than imagine different ways we could change the outside world, Ni acknowledges many different ways we could change the subjective meaning of things to ourselves by looking at them from different angles. Rather than directly confront an issue, Ni will often solve problems by simply looking at them from a different angle. Doing a bunch of community service sucks? Just think of it as an opportunity to get lots of exercise! Note that Ni doesn't think about how to change the outer world the way Ne does; it only thinks about how to change *the way we interpret* the outer world. Ni leads you to try and see "through the smoke and mirrors" to what is REALLY going on below the surface, that other people are not perceptive enough to pick up on...so in its unhealthy form, it turns into conspiracy theories, a la Dale Gribble from King of the Hill.

Um, I guess I'll disagree with some of the INxJ posters in this thread who disliked sim's definition of Ni, as the blip I quoted here really resonated with me, in terms of how I see my internal workings, in a much greater way than the majority of the voodoo-mystical-predicting-'zoinks, a-ha' crap that most people focus on when trying to say how they utilize Ni or view Ni in others.
 

Jaguar

Active member
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
20,647
Um, I guess I'll disagree with some of the INxJ posters in this thread who disliked sim's definition of Ni,[...]

Cas, it's Lenore Thomson's personal perspective on Ni, right out of her book. It is not any forum member's "definition."
It would be nice if someone changed the title of this thread, in order to reflect the appropriate source of the information.
 

SillySapienne

`~~Philosoflying~~`
Joined
Jan 14, 2008
Messages
9,801
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
4w5
And perhaps that's your ego talking, cuz you think you're the wisest person in the room.

Fi

Nope, depends on who's in the room. :D

Fi is ego-less.

Wrong is Wrong, Right is Right, and most things are ambiguously in between.

I'm open to modifying my assumptions, making concessions when necessary, and deep, soul penetrating apologies when I am uber-wrong.

Ne lends for seeing New ideas/connections to integrate into our model of our perceived lives and universes.

And, I am not so vacuous and arrogant to believe that I know everything, like duh, I live for more information.

But I will say this, my Fi exists as a conscience of its own, it knows when something is right or wrong, even when I am being/acting wrong.

:yes:
 

simulatedworld

Freshman Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2008
Messages
5,552
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
LOL, you guys and your open minds.

Ironically the ones who preach the most about how open their minds are (like say, spoiled rich kids who had everything handed to them from birth and thus never had to grow up or actually open their minds at all) tend to end up being the least open-minded. *ahem*



^ I've witnessed this firsthand. :/

Sorry, NTJs, but this is perhaps your Achilles heel.

Yeah, I mean, most people tend to think that way regardless of type; it's just NTJs who are especially arrogant about assuming they understand everything that goes into every other type's perspective enough to declare everyone else a total moron.

You can tell from the way the first thing they jump to every time they want to belittle someone is "YOU CLEARLY DO NOT HAVE SUBSTANTIAL ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL INFLUENCE LOL", as if anyone who doesn't place that as Primary Life Goal #1 is a complete ingrate. /vomit
 

SillySapienne

`~~Philosoflying~~`
Joined
Jan 14, 2008
Messages
9,801
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
4w5
Ironically the ones who preach the most about how open their minds are (like say, spoiled rich kids who had everything handed to them from birth and thus never had to grow up or actually open their minds at all) tend to end up being the least open-minded. *ahem*

^I don't follow this nasty stereotype, is it even a stereotype?

Because I never heard of it.

*scratches head*

I find the ones who preach how frackin' smerrt they are are usually not nearly as smerrt as they think they are.
 

simulatedworld

Freshman Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2008
Messages
5,552
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
It seems as though you are attempting to use typology as a means to analyze people's behavior. Since their behavior is abnormal to you, you jump to the conclusion that their opinions are void - like you responded to highlander by thrashing NTJs. (Contrary to what you have told me - "that by understanding typology, we can better appreciate other people's perspectives". All I see is depreciation. )

Analyzing people's behavior is a significant part of typology. Every type has a number of annoying things it tends to do as a result of overvaluing its own perspective--analyzing people's behavior might be one of those things for some of the NT types, in fact.

But uh, if you only see deprecation in my posts then you don't really read them. You must be looking for negativity if you can't recall reading anything positive about various types in my writing,

Since you are so willing to dismiss their opinions based on their performance, you evade evaluating the validity of your own statements, which is not a search for truth, but rather a search for finding ways to be critical of people.

Uh huh, and also a search for finding ways to compliment people. The idea is to understand the relative strengths and weaknesses of each archetype. If it makes you happy I can make a post detailing all the positives about each function attitude; I just happen to be discussing negatives in this particular thread.

If you are not keen on discovering the truth of typology, I'm really not sure why anyone would want to take your typologogical theories with anything but a grain of salt.

I think your Fi is offended that I'm insulting people's individuality by slandering the negative aspects of certain types.

Once again I'm kind of surprised you don't remember reading any analysis of the positives of any type in my writing. Are you really paying attention?



^I don't follow this nasty stereotype, is it even a stereotype?

Because I never heard of it.

*scratches head*

I find the ones who preach how frackin' smerrt they are are usually not nearly as smerrt as they think they are.

It's not a stereotype, no. It's a jab at a particular person.
 

Zarathustra

Let Go Of Your Team
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
Messages
8,110
Yeah, I mean, most people tend to think that way regardless of type; it's just NTJs who are especially arrogant about assuming they understand everything that goes into every other type's perspective enough to declare everyone else a total moron.

Translation: I'm perennially pissed off at Ni doms and auxs for their ability to see things from an encompassing perspective that incorporates as many disparate perspectives as possible, and not having ever experienced Ni, I don't really know whether it's true that they do this, but I do know that it bothers me when they put me down and say I'm not seeing the whole picture.

/truth
 
Top