User Tag List

First 1656646566676876 Last

Results 651 to 660 of 984

  1. #651
    FREEEEEEEEEEEEEE Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    14,457

    Default

    ^ that's a pretty good page. I just think it needs some work:
    "While not technically a judging function, Ni often functions in a convergent fashion, providing elegant answers and solutions to complex problems. As discussed above, Ni takes clues gathered by Se and unconsciously pieces them together toward a comprehensive solution."

    No. Se is not "the perceiving faculty." Perception gathers information, but it is not a cognitive faculty, not JCF.
    "Did you exchange
    A walk-on part in the war
    for a lead role in a cage?"

    "Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the mouth." Mike Tyson
    Likes Ravenetta liked this post

  2. #652
    darkened dreams Ravenetta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    isfp
    Enneagram
    4w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    8,850

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Poki View Post
    You don't need to judge. It either fits your internal vision or not(vision meant as in N, just an internal mental idea whether it be logic, concept, pattern, etc.). If it doesn't then it's wrong...lol. or it ends to be morphed to fit your vision. Why do you think thier external perception is inferior.
    I would consider it a judgment to decide whether it fits the internal vision.

    Let me give you a weird example from my experience that I've thought was Ni. Sometimes, when my mind wanders in a public setting like a restaurant, I'll see a stranger or acquaintance and my mind is momentarily flooded with images of how that person experiences every emotion from anger, sorrow to happiness. I get a vivid sense if they shut down and withdraw or lash out with anger. There is no setting or context, just an extrapolation from the gait of their walk and facial expression. I have no idea if that fits with my internal vision or not. I don't know if it's accurate or not. There is no way to verify it and I don't even know what to do with the "information". It is an abstract, intuitive perception that just happens. I could choose to declare myself a psychic and that I know emotionally personal things about a stranger. I could also say I am highly imaginative and like closure, so my mind invents these impressions to serve itself and it has nothing to do with reality. I could say that the subtleties of mannerism and expression contain the seed of truth about an entire person. I could also say that it is likely 20% correct because it is a mix of intuition and imagination. It doesn't fit my internal vision and it doesn't conflict with it either. It is just a weird experience that I have no idea what to do with. It hasn't happened in months, but it also represents my own internal struggle between perception and reason. For me the intuition perception (whether or not it maps to reality) can exist completely outside of judgment or internal frameworks. It is just incoming data that I generally file under "okay, that was weird" inside my head.

    Edit: It could be interesting to hear specific examples of intuition and how they require or do not require a preconceived internal framework.
    It's entirely possible and realistic to live your life in such a way that you don't accidentally rape people. ME
    The first principle is that you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool. FEYNMAN
    If this is monkey pee, you're on your own.SCULLY
    You have to let the metaphysical guy chase you. ABIGAIL

  3. #653
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    STP
    Posts
    10,641

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mal12345 View Post
    ^ that's a pretty good page. I just think it needs some work:
    "While not technically a judging function, Ni often functions in a convergent fashion, providing elegant answers and solutions to complex problems. As discussed above, Ni takes clues gathered by Se and unconsciously pieces them together toward a comprehensive solution."

    No. Se is not "the perceiving faculty." Perception gathers information, but it is not a cognitive faculty, not JCF.
    Please remove elegant and complex. Those are opinions and not facts. What is complex to one is simple to another. They create solutions, some of which I don't see is elegant and some of which can easily complicate simple matters. Yet they see as elegant and simple. In working with dom Ni I notice quite a bit of what I would consider a "hack" but it's a functional solution.

    Both simple, elegant, complex, etc. Are in the eye of the beholder.
    Im out, its been fun

  4. #654
    FREEEEEEEEEEEEEE Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    14,457

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by westrom View Post
    Ni vs Ne. lol.

    Ne expand possibilities, Ni narrow them down. That explains why Ne users are not certain at times. Ni are usually certain, as there are less ideas in their idea, to choose from.
    I'm just not buying into this certainty/uncertainty distinction between the two. Ne can and will have flashes of certainty. What you're not considering here, in making your distinction, is that the two functions are taking their information from totally opposite sources.
    "Did you exchange
    A walk-on part in the war
    for a lead role in a cage?"

    "Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the mouth." Mike Tyson
    Likes Ravenetta, Forever liked this post

  5. #655
    I decay Forever's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4dw sx/so
    Socionics
    IEI4 Ni
    Posts
    8,967

    Default

    I think there is a misconception that Ni people are always certain, wouldn't that be nice? Ni focuses its ideas into a narrower field not necessarily getting less but more potent ideas, it's just our inclination. When I use Ni, I can still get confused or lost if I just keep going to the wrong source or not allow myself to get into a perspective shift, without the shift life can be confusing even if you have less topics that you're interested in. I sometimes get the feel I wish I could have Ne so I can do something fun like journalism, but I won't do journalism because that is just too broad.

    Often we need our minds just as calm as everyone else if we want to know where to go in life. Uncertainty isn't always restricted to exclusively Ne dom/aux types.

    P is a preference, not a determinant.

  6. #656
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    350

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mal12345 View Post
    I'm just not buying into this certainty/uncertainty distinction between the two. Ne can and will have flashes of certainty. What you're not considering here, in making your distinction, is that the two functions are taking their information from totally opposite sources.
    Just because it can doesn't mean it's a significant chemical makeup of the type. Rather than attribute certainty towards Ni, I'd phrase it as more a catalyst for certainty. Ni is more singular in focus compared to Ne, seeking to refine ideas into a single entity. I think Ni users might find it more exhaustive to change opinions because everything is referenced in a sort of top down design. Changing opinions would mean tearing down everything. So what you see them doing is shifting perspective instead. Basically, this will look like certainty. I think when people attribute certainty towards Ni, what they are seeing is Ni in conjunction with a judging function, because when you observe people, you observe in a dynamic environment, not a vacuum.

    I can see Ni users being indecisive when the person is envisioning a scenario where there's an "end game" not in their favor and not allowing their extroverted functions to "fact check" their "subjective" impressions. In a way, this is still certainty, because you are essentially writing off reality, and giving up in resignation out of "knowing" what will be, rather than what could be. The "will be" part is reinforced by an introverted judging function, most likely (Fi or Ti).

  7. #657
    Senior Member Captain_Invincible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    MBTI
    ESTJ
    Enneagram
    IDK sx/so
    Posts
    708

    Default

    Would it be fair to define Ni as definitive Intuition? Intuition which seeks closure from the intuition within the unconscious mind, where as Ne is explorative, and is constantly searching for intuition based around outer stimuli and has/wants never ending possibilties?

  8. #658
    FREEEEEEEEEEEEEE Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    14,457

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hijynx View Post
    Just because it can doesn't mean it's a significant chemical makeup of the type.
    Ditto on the idea that Ni possesses certitude. There is certainty and uncertainty in both types.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hijynx View Post
    Rather than attribute certainty towards Ni, I'd phrase it as more a catalyst for certainty. Ni is more singular in focus compared to Ne, seeking to refine ideas into a single entity. I think Ni users might find it more exhaustive to change opinions because everything is referenced in a sort of top down design. Changing opinions would mean tearing down everything. So what you see them doing is shifting perspective instead. Basically, this will look like certainty. I think when people attribute certainty towards Ni, what they are seeing is Ni in conjunction with a judging function, because when you observe people, you observe in a dynamic environment, not a vacuum.

    I can see Ni users being indecisive when the person is envisioning a scenario where there's an "end game" not in their favor and not allowing their extroverted functions to "fact check" their "subjective" impressions. In a way, this is still certainty, because you are essentially writing off reality, and giving up in resignation out of "knowing" what will be, rather than what could be. The "will be" part is reinforced by an introverted judging function, most likely (Fi or Ti).
    Ni works from within an axiom-based conceptual system. Certainty is derived from these axioms, although it is rationalistic in nature, like mathematics. But the Ni type does not question them, or very rarely.

    Ni also has flashes on intuitive insight. It is often from these that the axioms are born, and they exist either to support an existing system or a new system is created based on those axioms, those flashes of insight.
    "Did you exchange
    A walk-on part in the war
    for a lead role in a cage?"

    "Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the mouth." Mike Tyson

  9. #659
    Senior Member VagrantFarce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    1,557

    Default

    I found a nice juxtaposition from Lenore Thompson, regarding Ni & Ne:

    ENPs are most visible in the first flush of discovery, when they're excited and optimistic. They aggressively seek feedback from the people around them, and they welcome others' involvement in formulating their Intuitions and carrying out their plans.

    INJs are least accessible in the discovery process. Like the prince in the story of "Cinderella", they're solitary, sometimes obsessive, fitting Intuition to expressible terms like the glass slipper to potential brides. Until they've managed a good enough fit between their inner reality and an outward vocabulary, INJs may not even know what they're after, and they won't involve others in formulating their plans.

    The goals these types posit are also inversely related. ENPs, as right-brain types, understand objects in terms of their larger context. They picture an integrated "whole" in which diverse people or diverse views are perfectly integrated - a global village, a unified theory, a consolidation of disciplines, a mind-body-spirit connection.

    The left brain INJs understand context as a mental phenomenon, something that people bring to the outer world from within. Thus, they don't see "wholeness" as an integrated endpoint. Wholeness, for INJs, is the chaotic beginning - raw sensory input without meaning.
    Hello
    Likes Ravenetta, Z Buck McFate liked this post

  10. #660
    Happy Dancer uumlau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    953 sp/so
    Posts
    5,708

    Default

    ENPs might want to interact with people during their discovery process, but are actually very private about formulating and executing plans (Ti/Fi).

    INJs don't interact much during their discovery process, but are remarkably public about formulating and executing plans (Te/Fe).
    An argument is two people sharing their ignorance.

    A discussion is two people sharing their understanding, even when they disagree.

Similar Threads

  1. [INTJ] What the hell is an INTJ?
    By Haphazard in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 12-07-2012, 06:04 PM
  2. Naomi Klein: What the hell is her problem, anyway?
    By pure_mercury in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-21-2009, 05:37 PM
  3. Replies: 11
    Last Post: 04-28-2009, 12:55 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO