• 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.

Ne/Ni Jungian Cognitive Function Interaction

uumlau

Happy Dancer
Joined
Feb 9, 2010
Messages
5,517
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
953
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
This is an interesting comparison of Ne and Ni. And from your definitions, I would CERTAINLY have Ni, not Ne.:wtf:

I give up. Really.

Are you sure this is Ne vs. Ni?

Yeah, I'm sure, but it's more of "how the functions are used," than it is "this is what a person who has the function as dominant behaves." Check out the Little Linguist video here, for an example of Ne thinking in an Ne dom.

As an Ne-dom, I can assure you, it is very difficult to stay inside my head for any amount of time.

Pretty much the only time I'm not scanning the environment is when I'm asleep.

And I really don't sleep that much (on average, about 4-5 hours a night, and still have plenty of energy).


It seems like some people can't accept that Ne REALLY IS an EXTRAVERTED function.

Why is this?

Also---Isn't it the combination of Ne and Ji (Fi or Ti) that generates ideas in Ne-doms, rather than Ne itself?

In the Little Linguist video I link above, she's talking about how she looks at things, but doesn't really look at things. That's totally Ne. She sees the sun, thinks of the rays shining down, and eventually her thoughts turn to religion and wondering about why people believe in religions ... when all she did was look at the sun.

So, yes, totally extroverted, but also the environment scan induces a lot of inside-the-head thoughts.

In INTPs and INFPs, Ne doesn't work quite that way, working from the environment first. Instead, the INxPs start off with Ji, and then Ne will often jump from there. The process can also be Ne->Ji, but usually it's from inside to outside for the introverts. This can result in creative story telling, as I depicted earlier, or it can just be their attempt to express their thoughts (Fi or Ti), using Ne to figure out the best associations to turn their ideas into words and communicate them (with varying degrees of success).

In other words, Ne is extroverted, but it isn't always the dominant function. Other people use it differently.


If it is, I fall in the category as well (granted, I've done little except brainstorm stories at this point, but I know that is how I think.. one story I have barely has a plot, let alone subplots. It's all conceptualization of background, costumes, belief systems, class structure, etc.. It's like I have to build a little stage before a good idea in terms of plot develops. In one particular case, I anthromorphized some of the animal kingdoms in the Amazon and Africa. A bit passe, I guess.. but it was only after that that I noticed a better plotline to play with them).

I've always envied the other process (if it's Ne, so be it). "The only thing you can do on TV that you can't do in film is make a continuing story - which is so cool!" -David Lynch (he's probably an extreme example though. He just pushes forward almost any random idea or subplot. It's funny.).

Yeah, KDude, your story brainstorming is very much Ni: you figure out the world and how it works, but actually making a story happen is a lot harder. It isn't where the Ni mindset goes.

I'm fairly sure from his writing that Joss Whedon is an INFJ. I get the feeling that he uses Ni to develop a strong background, and then uses Fe to determine how the story should play out. He's partially using Fe to figure out what would be a dramatic and effective story, as well as for portraying the various characters.
 

Wonkavision

Retired Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2009
Messages
1,154
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
7w8
In other words, Ne is extroverted, but it isn't always the dominant function. Other people use it differently.

Yeah, I realize that. But even when it's not the dominant function, it's still extraverted.

That's the part you don't seem to believe.


Oh well. People don't really want to understand typology here. They just want to navel gaze and posit their crackpot theories. :D

Keep thinking of Little Linguist as an example of an Ne-dom and your understanding of Ne will continue to be distorted.

She's not an ENFP.

She's an awesome ENFJ. :yes:
 

KDude

New member
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
8,243
Interesting, Wonkavision.. Since they're not extroverts like you, how, in your opinion, does an INXP exercise Ne/"extroverted perception" in their downtime? Couldn't they be going over Si data, and using Ne in tandem (wouldn't this, in effect, sort of be a partly introverted form of Ne)? Or are they still mostly Ne in their enclosed surroundings? How would they go about generating ideas with just that? There's only so much to see that way. Yet, in practice, INXP's have plenty of ideas to share. Where are they getting them?
 

KDude

New member
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
8,243
Ugh. I just made a mistake: Equating "Si" strictly with memory. Sorry about that.

That all aside, surely memory plays a big part in INXP (or anyone, for that matter. Then again, maybe not! It seems like it doesn't in some people).
 

Wonkavision

Retired Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2009
Messages
1,154
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
7w8
Interesting, Wonkavision.. Since they're not extroverts like you, how, in your opinion, does an INXP exercise Ne/"extroverted perception" in their downtime? Couldn't they be going over Si data, and using Ne in tandem (wouldn't this, in effect, sort of be a partly introverted form of Ne)? Or are they still mostly Ne in their enclosed surroundings? How would they go about generating ideas with just that? There's only so much to see that way. Yet, in practice, INXP's have plenty of ideas to share. Where are they getting them?

Whoa. NO.

I don't think INxPs are "still mostly Ne in their enclosed surroundings."

Nothing of the sort.

I don't think INxPs are EVER "mostly Ne."

That doesn't make sense.


Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're saying though. :shrug:


But as far as how they exercise their Extraverted Perception, it would basically the same way as an Ne-dom, wouldn't it?

I really don't know, to be honest. But it just seems to me that Extraverted Perception is Extraverted Perception, regardless of whether it's dom or aux.

I may try to come up with a more thoughtful explanation some other time, but for now I'm content to say I'm only guessing about Secondary Ne.

I feel much more confident talking about Dom Ne.
 

Andy

Supreme High Commander
Joined
Nov 16, 2009
Messages
1,211
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Yeah, I realize that. But even when it's not the dominant function, it's still extraverted.

That's the part you don't seem to believe.


Oh well. People don't really want to understand typology here. They just want to navel gaze and posit their crackpot theories. :D

Keep thinking of Little Linguist as an example of an Ne-dom and your understanding of Ne will continue to be distorted.

She's not an ENFP.

She's an awesome ENFJ. :yes:

Yes, I've noticed that people often seem to struggle with the idea that extroverted functions are action orientated. Sometimes, when I'm feeling cynical, it strikes me as an excuse to think you can exercise e type functions by sitting around thinking about stuff.

Interesting, Wonkavision.. Since they're not extroverts like you, how, in your opinion, does an INXP exercise Ne/"extroverted perception" in their downtime? Couldn't they be going over Si data, and using Ne in tandem (wouldn't this, in effect, sort of be a partly introverted form of Ne)? Or are they still mostly Ne in their enclosed surroundings? How would they go about generating ideas with just that? There's only so much to see that way. Yet, in practice, INXP's have plenty of ideas to share. Where are they getting them?

Ne is when the INP stops thinking about their ideas and starts living them. It's when the INTP stops doing calculations and goes down the lab to see that actually happens when you try to burn Titanium filings. It's also when the INFP stops think that charity shops are a noble idea and goes to work in one.
 

KDude

New member
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
8,243
Whoa. NO.

I don't think INxPs are "still mostly Ne in their enclosed surroundings."

Nothing of the sort.

I don't think INxPs are EVER "mostly Ne."

That doesn't make sense.


Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're saying though. :shrug:


But as far as how they exercise their Extraverted Perception, it would basically the same way as an Ne-dom, wouldn't it?

I really don't know, to be honest. But it just seems to me that Extraverted Perception is Extraverted Perception, regardless of whether it's dom or aux.

I may try to come up with a more thoughtful explanation some other time, but for now I'm content to say I'm only guessing about Secondary Ne.

I feel much more confident talking about Dom Ne.

Cool enough.

And yeah, I know they're Fi/Ti dom, but when I say "mostly", I'm just wondering if they're mostly Ne in a percieving way. Or are they entrenched in Fi/Ti thought (with some Si to boot)?

Eh.. This is getting convoluted actually. Forget that part.

Hmm.. :thinking: It's funny that I can't imagine what life is like for Ti/Fi doms anymore. What you're saying kind of puts another nail in the coffin that I ever was one.
 

Thalassa

Permabanned
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
25,183
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sx
Yeah, I'm sure, but it's more of "how the functions are used," than it is "this is what a person who has the function as dominant behaves." Check out the Little Linguist video here, for an example of Ne thinking in an Ne dom.



In the Little Linguist video I link above, she's talking about how she looks at things, but doesn't really look at things. That's totally Ne. She sees the sun, thinks of the rays shining down, and eventually her thoughts turn to religion and wondering about why people believe in religions ... when all she did was look at the sun.

Yeah, okay, I get it. I do that too. In fact, to actually REALLY look at something -just look at it and be in the moment and use Se - without
doing that I almost have to be in some altered state, ironically. I think for some people it's the other way around...:laugh:
 

skylights

i love
Joined
Jul 6, 2010
Messages
7,756
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
LL's thought process sounds rather similar to mine - moves quickly from the practical to the conceptual - but i'm not sure if that's just an N thing or really a Ne or Ni thing. i come off very differently than she does according to a few people i've asked but by no means does that make her not an ENFP. she is very original. :yes:

But as far as how they exercise their Extraverted Perception, it would basically the same way as an Ne-dom, wouldn't it?

yes. as far as i have heard INFP/INTPs talk about aux Ne, it's very much the same - as it theoretically should be.

Ne in anyone is still Ne. it can either be used for Ji purposes, in a Ji dom, or sifted for Ji purposes, in a Ne dom, but Ne functioning in and of itself will still be iNtuition used on external objects - jung's definition of Ne. i also think it can, via Ji, come very close to - and in some circumstances merge with or turn into - Ni. we do use all of the functions all the time, and i think we can use our dom/aux to push us to better use our shadow functions if we try.

incidentally haha i don't sleep much either.

KDude said:
And yeah, I know they're Fi/Ti dom, but when I say "mostly", I'm just wondering if they're mostly Ne in a percieving way. Or are they entrenched in Fi/Ti thought (with some Si to boot)?

i agree with uumlau on this - the main difference between NeFi and FiNe would seem to be that Fi thought generally precedes/directs Ne for FiNe, whereas it generally arranges/redirects Ne for NeFi. when push comes to shove Fi dom will err to the side of Fi and Ne dom will err to the side of Ne. however, i do not believe that means that Fi dom cannot get off on a primarily Ne tangent or that Ne dom cannot delve into a primarily Fi determination - or allow any other function to take the lead, for that matter. it seems silly to think that we have to have one process overwhelmingly coopting our thought. they're simply preferences, given all else is equal.

Zarathustra said:
There's always that damn question of whether various functions team together and then look like one other function, or whether a person is really just using that other function (in this case, an INTJ using Ne).

that too. and where the function combination ceases and crosses over into a single function. where is wildcat's math when you need it? :D

Yes, I've noticed that people often seem to struggle with the idea that extroverted functions are action orientated. Sometimes, when I'm feeling cynical, it strikes me as an excuse to think you can exercise e type functions by sitting around thinking about stuff.

yeah, agree. Pe doms - at least speaking for the ones i know - get pretty bored pretty fast. we seek external stimulation, be that from external idea flow (thus it being okay to sit around in class for a while) or from environmental change via travel or whatever.

and there's no question you can be a lazy Pe dom, but you're still going to seek external stimulation from the internet, etc. but ENxP would wither away if left in a jail cell to ponder, or whatever, just like our Se dom counterparts.

KDude said:
. It's all conceptualization of background, costumes, belief systems, class structure, etc.. It's like I have to build a little stage before a good idea in terms of plot develops.

:thelook: this is how my process works too when i come up with big stories. i'm not convinced it's all Ni. i think that's just NF building atmosphere and culture and other iNtuitive/Feely stuff. in fact, i don't really even like building stories. i just like building environments. it's the downfall of my writing.

tiltyred said:
When you sit back and look at it, does it seem odd all of a sudden that we usually let the other person lead?

yes. :laugh: especially because it confuses NFPs. in general we figure that if you're suddenly silent, we've done something wrong. it doesn't make sense because of how consistent you usually are in your life otherwise.

highlander said:
What I can speak to from a practical perspective is my experience as an INTJ with ENFPs. My experience is that there is a special kind of interpersonal chemistry that seems to exist. I tend to think they're funny, they cause me to lighten up, and they provide a perspective that I simply don't have. I enjoy the interaction. On the negative side, they can see me as being overly critical at times and I can feel a bit exhausted during or after the interaction with them.

:yes:

Kalach said:
Why do Ne users never conclude? They have a judgment function. Why do they maintain an earnest innocence? A kind of seeming guilelessness. It's that openness crap. The openness to new information. So how do they actual learn anything? Ni does this compounding thing, it seems to me. But where do Ne users store their insights? Or do they store them? They must have something for Ne to work with. It does not come new and freshly formed to every new environment. They do grow in Ne ability. Where's it kept?

we don't conclude because it's a subjective judgment function. it applies to us, but that does not mean it necessarily applies to you. Ni puts me on edge because i don't like to assume that what i can see so clearly through my own perspective is the same for everyone else. i appreciate, though do not understand, Ni accuracy.

in addition to what poki and phobik explained, for ENFP, our Ne insights shape our Fi. thus they are stored in our Fi feelings and reactions, as well as in Si, of course. they also are output into writing and speech via Te, which we then remember.

Invisible Jim said:
These types often lament that they feel like 'knowledge thieves' taking others ideas and seeing alternate uses for them

i have felt that in the past. the observation is legitimate.

though i cannot deny that i am picking up on a certain amount of subtle prejudice against Ne because it seems "superficial" and/or "stupid" to some Ni dom/aux.
 

Thalassa

Permabanned
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
25,183
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sx
Yeah, I realize that. But even when it's not the dominant function, it's still extraverted.

That's the part you don't seem to believe.


Oh well. People don't really want to understand typology here. They just want to navel gaze and posit their crackpot theories. :D

Keep thinking of Little Linguist as an example of an Ne-dom and your understanding of Ne will continue to be distorted.

She's not an ENFP.

She's an awesome ENFJ. :yes:


You also seem to think I'm ESFP, so I don't trust ya.

No offense.
 

highlander

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 23, 2009
Messages
26,562
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Yeah, I'm sure, but it's more of "how the functions are used," than it is "this is what a person who has the function as dominant behaves." Check out the Little Linguist video here, for an example of Ne thinking in an Ne dom.

What an outstanding example of Ne!!!

Keep thinking of Little Linguist as an example of an Ne-dom and your understanding of Ne will continue to be distorted.

She's not an ENFP.

She's an awesome ENFJ. :yes:

That would mean she's describing - Fe or Ni??? I may not know much, but I don't think so.
 

the state i am in

Active member
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
2,475
MBTI Type
infj
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
i don't understand how people see Ni/Ne as conflicting. in lifestyle choices, maybe, but in conversation???

i don't communicate with anyone better than i communicate with Ne doms. if our values don't line up, or our interests don't line up, we're still not going to be that engaged (at least, at first). but Ne is so capable of expanding Ni, materializing it, finding possibilities that branch off the germinal ideas and inductive abstractions we have buried in our connectionist frameworks. the patterns we sense they grasp and often see too in more grounded conceptual systems and applications.

there's an obvious tension between exploring new possibilities for Ne and gravitating towards the central problem and working it over and over with Ni. but they (Ne) users just need to approach the problem subjectively, in a more experiential, spatial, imagining from the center point, where relevancy and possibilities determine where to go and what maneuvers/connections are possible. whereas we rely on semantic webs, traveling along them, picking up meaning, and occasionally creating representations or ideated spokespersons to communicate amongst each other, so that we can find a way to get as many details on the same map and get those details to assemble in a way that makes sense, flows, feels properly connected.

yeah, Ne users want to explore possibilities and see where they can end up by reasoning (yes, more deductively) choice by choice (in a sequential manner). but i love that! they keep attacking at new angles, looking for a way to unbalance the equation, keeping multiple threads open so they can snip off whatever sequences work and weave them back together to find a way through the system we are constructing (maybe i have more experience with this kind of conversation with entps than enfps?). meanwhile, we are assembling a map of everything that we have discussed, our best possibilities, our best ideas, and are refocusing and recontextualizing everything we have learned as relates to the problem, what's left to solve, what pieces are still left unconnected, etc.

it seems so mind-bogglingly productive--i don't know how others seem so frustrated that we are not exactly the same. engaging with Ne and working together, communicating in a focused way, it's so liberating for me. i don't have to try so hard to translate--it just works right away. it's addicting.

i don't know exactly how i relate to enfps quite as well, although i know that the sense of inspiration, of desire to share the whole of ourselves, to confront the problems of the self, to grow into perfect beings capable of harmonizing the world--the communication as far as ideas and systems go is more difficult, but the sense of purpose is equally great, and the emotional connection makes up for the somewhat more murky idealogues.
 

Synapse

New member
Joined
Dec 29, 2007
Messages
3,359
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4
Deciphering Ni, and the difference from Ne (and Si)

This interpretation of Ni and Ne belongs here.

Both Ne and Ni are associated with "connections", and it often becomes hard to tell which is which from the definitions. But Ne's connections between different things would be like my attempts to connect together different personality typing systems according to corresponding elements. These elements (such as factors and temperaments) would be the external objects being focused on. The connections between them are likewise external (such as different systems having analogues to "extroversion"). Ni's connections are deeper and harder to pin down, but would involve elements such as "meanings" that underlie the surface parts.

In light of Beren's "philosophy of life" descriptions for the "operating Charter" concept; I find that they hold the key for completely cracking this confusion of Ni with Ne.

Ne: There are always other perspectives and new meanings to discover
Ni: There is always a future to realize and a significance to be revealed.

"Revealed" basically means "uncovered". So it's a matter of UNcovered versus DIScovered. They sound synonymous, but there really is a difference.

un- prefix of reversal (from PIE *anti "facing opposite, near, in front of, before")
dis- "do the opposite of" (from PIE *dis- "apart, asunder")

"uncover" or "reveal" implies that something was covered, and now we're reversing this.

For "discover", the object is not necessarily covered to begin with. It's just not known about, and instead of covering it, so it remains unknown, we're doing the opposite of covering it, and making people aware of it.

So "discover" reflects Ne's external focus, of meanings that are implicit in the object, yet are being made known to observers by the subject relaying the information. "uncover/reveal" reflects Ni's internal focus, where a subject picks up a significance that has apparently been covered, and now reverses this by applying it to the various objects involved.

Also, we have new meanings vs significance.

Ni is about significance, which is really a subjective thing, not directly implicit in the object.

A good way I have just thought of of describing this is what I have called an "event template". In the forest analogy, the template would be what the forest was said to be symbolic of. Life's interconnectedness, which includes recycling. Things are created, then destroyed, and new things are created from the, Hence, the replacement of forest with a housing development (possibly with materials made from the forest!) will play out this pattern.

The "underdog loses out to the big and powerful" is another example.

It tied to experiences I had, and formed what I'm calling a "template". A sort of situational counterpart to an archetype.

Another template is based on Aliens, where they make the exciting discovery of life on another planet, but the guy has the horrible experience with the face-hugger. When it comes off; it seems he is all right, and he tries to move on from that trauma and in somewhat of a daze, get back to normal life by eating with the others. But then, that's when the horror of horrors happens. The alien inside him bursts out. This is what loomed in my mind as I had to walk around in this heat after loosing so much blood, and I tried to be OK and get back to normal, but the others were saying I was not completely myself, and almost in a daze. Luckily, no further horror happened after that. Still, it all fit into these templates.

The templates are purely my own in applying to situations; hence, introverted, and yet they do tie into universals (hence, other people using the same concepts), which is also characteristic of introverted functions. Those would be the internal "focal points" of the illustration I posted.

So what ends up happening, is that whenever there is some really exciting event or prospect, I have this back-of-my-mind fear that something really bad is going to happen. Of course, Ni for me is in the shadow, in the "Senex" or "critical parent" position. It is negative, and very incomplete, and not a good guide at all.

So now we see the basis of Berens' description of Critical Ni for INxP's as "putting a damper on plans for the future with negative thoughts of how things will be". It's based on a sort of negative template. My "good" parent Ne tells me that the negative is only a possibility, but more likely (looking at the external data available so far), things will go all right. Yet for some reason I lock on to this negative possibility. I'm no longer exploring possibilities; now I'm inferring significance.

For NJ's, this function will be more mature, and they will have more positive uses of it, which will also be more likely to come true, as more indepth, complete templates will be created, which will pick up more cues on whether a particular outing really fits into the template that ends in disaster. From what I have heard, many of them have learned to keep this stuff to themselves, being we are in a heavy S[J] society that thinks it's weird. (Ni is at the bottom of their shadow, after all).

I have noticed that the language of Ni types will often be filled with references to fictional stories and proverbs. These form the templates Ni plays off of; or more accurately, rather than being original templates themselves, they more likely fit into timeless templates (i.e. universals) that Ni uses fiction and current experience to link all together. ENTP John Beebe also does this a lot, and this would be Ni backing up his dominant Ne (with "parent" Ti), in discussing his theories. He himself has said that the study of archetypes are the domain of Ni.

Ni is often described as dealing with "frameworks", which is a term usually associated with Ti (also making it confusing). But Ti deals with frameworks of judgment, you make decisions with, such as sets of principles. Ni would deal with frameworks of perception, in which you take in new information. I would say all four introverted functions have frameworks. Ti is logical frameworks (called "principles"), Fi is ethical frameworks ("values"), Si is concrete frameworks (i.e. memories of how things should be), and Ni is abstract frameworks, such as these event templates.

Ni is often confused with Si even, because a person can look at how events play out over and over, and then get a sense of what will happen in the future. However, this can be Si. Looking at how gravity always pulls things down, and then deducing that something you let go of will drop would be Si. It is concrete data. It's the act of creating a template of events that is the process of abstracting (from memories), not just any "foretelling" of the future. It generates a concept.

This also brings to light the fact that the simplistic descriptions of Ni as "foretelling the future" really do not do the function justice. This is what has made it so hard to figure out all this time. And any person who seems to have some sort of "visions" of the future is automatically made into an NJ type. The templates may give you a sense of what will happen, and you can loosely call them "visions", but they are not glimpses into the future.

Another example is in one of Berens' descriptions of Ni; a person choosing a dog has a "vision" of a dog barking and crying, and then realizes that they should get a dog that didn't mind being alone. This doesn't even have anything to do with any particular singular event being "predicted". It was a template or model of a situation that was referenced to inform a decision for the better, to avoid that template possibly being realized in a future event.
 

Kalach

Filthy Apes!
Joined
Dec 3, 2008
Messages
4,310
MBTI Type
INTJ
"Template" isn't a good word. I remember complaining about it before somewhere in the Sim's Ni Definition thread. It seems to me "template" describes, if anything, the end product, and leaves unrevealed where those templates came from. Tapping into the universal unconscious or whatever, Ni is subjective and if it uses templates at all, it will be templates it has created all on its lonesome.

See, it's we make stuff up. It isn't meant to be objective. To even attempt to pretend it's objective or in some sense "real", is to try making out we're using Ne backwards or using Si like everyone else. But we're not.

I want to say Ni is a creative process, that it isn't as fixed or conservative or even secretly objective as "template" suggests. It is after all a perception function. New stuff comes from it. One is meant to "see" novelties. And not objective novelties, either. No, just made up stuff. There'll be some categorisation, or something like categorisation, as befits any i function, a ranking or ordering of possibility, a measure of the possibility of possibility, and there'll be some limit imposed by extroverted (and introverted) judgment, and both of those aspects of the process will be part, perhaps a significant part, of how we get to see the future with any kind of accuracy, but truly, we make stuff up.
 

Synapse

New member
Joined
Dec 29, 2007
Messages
3,359
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4
"Template" isn't a good word.

Yeah the Template business reminded me of [youtube="zIlHoHiL4xE"]The Tripods[/youtube]. hahaha good times, like brand templates in the forehead. :cheese:

Totally unrelated but still, I did find the terminology of template's unsatisfying too.
 

Eric B

ⒺⓉⒷ
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
3,621
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
548
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
"Template" isn't a good word. I remember complaining about it before somewhere in the Sim's Ni Definition thread. It seems to me "template" describes, if anything, the end product, and leaves unrevealed where those templates came from. Tapping into the universal unconscious or whatever, Ni is subjective and if it uses templates at all, it will be templates it has created all on its lonesome.

See, it's we make stuff up. It isn't meant to be objective. To even attempt to pretend it's objective or in some sense "real", is to try making out we're using Ne backwards or using Si like everyone else. But we're not.

I want to say Ni is a creative process, that it isn't as fixed or conservative or even secretly objective as "template" suggests. It is after all a perception function. New stuff comes from it. One is meant to "see" novelties. And not objective novelties, either. No, just made up stuff. There'll be some categorisation, or something like categorisation, as befits any i function, a ranking or ordering of possibility, a measure of the possibility of possibility, and there'll be some limit imposed by extroverted (and introverted) judgment, and both of those aspects of the process will be part, perhaps a significant part, of how we get to see the future with any kind of accuracy, but truly, we make stuff up.

Now, that is not saying that Ni itself is a template or templates, if that's what you think. I was just trying to describe the "abstract frameworks", or "patterns/connections" Ni references, especially in contrast to the kinds of "patterns/connections" referenced by Ne.

Yeah, I imagine there could be a better word, but that was the one that I thought of at the time which really seemed to explain it.
Simply "model" is another one, which would convey the same thing, and be shared by all the introverted functions.
 

Kalach

Filthy Apes!
Joined
Dec 3, 2008
Messages
4,310
MBTI Type
INTJ
I think I want to resist anything as finalised even as "model". I guess by dint of having an extroverted judgment function so close to the surface, it seems to me that order lies "out there", not "in here". On the inside I want to be open and unassuming, allowing a fluidity of concept. Pretty much what one would expect an Ne person to say of "out there", I guess.

There is of course still the question of how Ni does what it does. I sort of like the idea that there's some sense of what is possible, and it acts like a semantic operator of some kind, promoting or allowing construction--the making up of stuff. This arrives in something like the way any introverted function develops relations between items of introverted consciousness. Similar somehow to what Ti does in developing the underlying personal logic. Some kind of categorisation or engineering principle that gets not only invoked but is itself modified as time goes by.

I like that idea. I don't know if it is meaningful, however. I may be sneaking inference into the notion somehow, and possibly that is illegitimate. The idea is that, I guess, as Ni develops, one can determine the system by looking at all its product or by looking at the semantic operation it has come to embody.

Even that seems a bit too rigid a conception.



Meh. I dunno. Just making stuff up again. :cheese:
 

Eric B

ⒺⓉⒷ
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
3,621
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
548
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
In another thread on this, it seemed you all preferred the term "meta-perspective", but that to me is harder to understand. In fact, the definition of that was something about "the view I have of you" or something like that.

It's funny, as I got that from Wikipedia and/or Wiktionary, and now the entries on both seem to be gone
 

Salomé

meh
Joined
Sep 25, 2008
Messages
10,527
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
And I know Ne people have trouble with it for exactly that reason. It's not real, they think, it's just a possibility.
The problem is not that it's not real. Ne moves very quickly from the concrete to the abstract (its natural habitat). It lives in the world of possibilities. The problem is that you don't "show your work". How did you arrive at your conclusion? Seems even you guys don't know. So why should anyone else trust it?
Why do Ne users never conclude? They have a judgment function. Why do they maintain an earnest innocence? A kind of seeming guilelessness. It's that openness crap. The openness to new information. So how do they actual learn anything? Ni does this compounding thing, it seems to me. But where do Ne users store their insights? Or do they store them? They must have something for Ne to work with. It does not come new and freshly formed to every new environment. They do grow in Ne ability. Where's it kept?
LOL. This is an odd perspective. It's like asking why does Time never end?
I think in some sense it's kept "out there". As they grow increasingly aware of the patterns that exist in the world, they recognise them more often (and move on to more sophisticated versions or to wholly different environments). They don't compound insights into new items so much as they map what's there. (And there'll be some Si library of some kind, but that's another story.) Or so I imagine.
This is completely off. Ne is ALL about arriving at new insights by creating connections between previously disparate fields of thought.
 
Top