• 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 Conflicts

rav3n

.
Joined
Aug 6, 2010
Messages
11,655
Yes, we suck when we are bound.

(no pun intended!)
Very, very true but Ne users also suck when their Fe gets in the way and they're set on alignment their way. Flex with me is different from flex my way.
 
G

Glycerine

Guest
Other than my last two posts, I don't see too much conflict between Ne/Ni. It's interesting though that I get along with NTPs, ENTJs and SFPs a little better than NFPs in relation to the N + judging function perspective.
 

uumlau

Happy Dancer
Joined
Feb 9, 2010
Messages
5,517
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
953
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
Considering that Highlander is using a quote of mine to start the discussion, I should perhaps chime in.

Overall I've observed the following:

  • Te/Fi vs Fe/Ti seem to generate the most misunderstanding and agitation, since they determine what kind of conclusions one believes to be reasonable.
  • N vs S doesn't generate misunderstandings so much as a degree of incompatibility, as the interests of each can differ significantly.
  • Ni vs Ne generates some mild incompatibility (the "myopic" observation), but generally get along as usually both parties tend to appreciate what the other sees.

There is actually a slightly stronger aspect of the Ni vs Ne difference which is an interesting conflict between Ni and Si. As I explained in another thread that I don't care to look up right now, while Ne endeavors to look outside the box, seeing the box as "way over there" while one's thoughts are "way over here," Ni instead makes new boxes and tries out lots of different boxes. Due to its association with Si, Si sees a single box, or an array or grid of boxes. The boxes, as Si, don't subjectively change, but are experienced as being rather concrete.

At an extreme level, older, very experienced and smart INTPs tend to have very "Si-specific" ideas about everything they know, and it's hard for a new idea to find its way in if it is perceived to contradict what is already known. Einstein is a very good example of this. In spite of making the second major breakthrough in quantum mechanics (describing the photoelectric effect), his attitude toward most quantum mechanics research of his time was very reactionary. He just couldn't believe that it was truly that random. (Of course, he never had the benefit of Feynman's quantum electrodynamics predict quantum behavior to one part in a billion, which is absurdly accurate for most deterministic physics experiments, never mind something as "random" as quantum mechanics.)

I would suggest that the Ne/Si attitude is along the lines of always searching for something new (Ne), and that as one learns and gathers new information, it gradually becomes "old" (Si), and is regarded as a known fact.

The Ni/Se attitude differs in that the external world is regarded as an ongoing input of empirical data (Te, Fe, Se), and that one has to continually adjust one's own perspective (Ni) in order to make sense of the whole.

Ni (in an INTJ for example) can still be just as stubborn as the INTP's Ti/Si "matrix", but is of a very different nature, where it exists. Ni tends to combine with the extroverted judging function and intimidate those around into backing away from arguments, which is an ironic tendency because Ni very much desires the dialectic debate and contest of ideas. Also, Ni has often made some very odd subjective assumptions which may be entirely correct, but it can be extremely difficult for others to figure out how to analyze and poke at those assumptions, especially if those others don't have Ni.

Having observed many INTJ/INTP conversations about complex theoretical topics, I've noted that the INTP will work toward finding common definitions (Si), while the INTJ will work toward finding a common frame or perspective (Ni). This can work out badly (or, more likely, just require a LOT more work) in those cases where the Ni perspective involves several very-slightly-different definitions from a given standard Si perspective.

For an intuitive understanding of the prior paragraph, consider a typical color selection UI which isn't just a list of standard colors, but the entire spectrum from red to purple, light to dark:
color-selector-editor.png


The Ni approach is analogous to saying "that color" and clicking the one spot on that grid and sliding the shading bar on the right to just the right shade. Below this UI, there are a bunch of boxes that list the intensity of each of Red, Green and Blue, with specific values from 0-255. [The Hue, Sat, and Lum values are a dependent set of values that describe the same color as the Red, Green and Blue values - a completely different definition in a different frame, describing the same thing, and in fact map directly to the horizontal, vertical and sidebar positions of the cursors. Very Ni.;)] This list of values is analogous to the Ti/Si definition of color. So Ni wants to adjust the perspective such that it is a slightly lighter shade of lavender, but over in Si-data-point land, it involves tweaking each color definition by a very fixed and precise amount, say Red +2, Blue -3 and Green +4. So the Ni perspective will see a very simple tweak that "makes everything work out", but this involves changing all three definitions of which the INTP is keeping careful track.

Thus it can require a lot of feedback between both parties to achieve both the proper definitional agreements and perspective agreements. Once the agreements are achieved, then the ideas tend to bounce around between the two far more cooperatively.

As for whether this is the INTP's Ne/Si, or really "just Ti", watch the precision with which INFPs (Fi, Ne, Si, Te) state their ideas, and how nitpicky they get when a description is ever-so-slightly off, in their estimation. It's the same Ne/Si in play. I don't see similar evidence of such behavior from ISTPs or ISFPs.

EDIT: To give credit where credit is due, much of my observations I make here were originally noted by Orobas, and I've gotten a very good feel for where these Ni/Si issues come into play due to several long, in-person conversations with her. Since she is Ne/Fi/Te/Si, I share the Te/Fi but not the Ne/Si, so where we have issues sharing ideas, it appears when I keep on presenting hypotheses that seem to "tear down" her rather fixed Fi/Si notion of how things work, and rebuild something brand new in its place. The compromise between the two perspectives is aided by noting that the new construction is entirely temporary, unless it is actually better.
 

highlander

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 23, 2009
Messages
26,562
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Very, very true but Ne users also suck when their Fe gets in the way and they're set on alignment their way. Flex with me is different from flex my way.

Of course, there are Ne types that prefer Fi
 

Thalassa

Permabanned
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
25,183
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sx
Very, very true but Ne users also suck when their Fe gets in the way and they're set on alignment their way. Flex with me is different from flex my way.

But see here - this is a problem with Fe, mostly. Wouldn't have that problem with an NFP. I'm just sayin'.
 

rav3n

.
Joined
Aug 6, 2010
Messages
11,655
But see here - this is a problem with Fe, mostly. Wouldn't have that problem with an NFP. I'm just sayin'.
Don't get me started on NFPs! :laugh:

While I like NFPs in general, there can be some real disconnects due to decision-making process differences.

Cognitive processes don't happen in a vacuum.
 

Thalassa

Permabanned
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
25,183
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sx
Don't get me started on NFPs! :laugh:

While I like NFPs in general, there can be some real disconnects due to decision-making process differences.

Cognitive processes don't happen in a vacuum.

Well you're gonna have disconnects with anybody. Even people of your own type can get on your nerves. It's just all about recognizing the differences and working through them because you understand them because you know their type.
 
G

Glycerine

Guest
Don't get me started on NFPs! :laugh:

While I like NFPs in general, there can be some real disconnects due to decision-making process differences.

Cognitive processes don't happen in a vacuum.

These are only the negatives. From my experience,They have a really hard time deciding on things or their Ne is so ingenious and brilliant ideas that its the best way. As a result, they will bulldoze others with Fi and Te to get their way.
 

Red Herring

Superwoman
Joined
Jun 9, 2010
Messages
7,488
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Having observed many INTJ/INTP conversations about complex theoretical topics, I've noted that the INTP will work toward finding common definitions (Si), while the INTJ will work toward finding a common frame or perspective (Ni). This can work out badly (or, more likely, just require a LOT more work) in those cases where the Ni perspective involves several very-slightly-different definitions from a given standard Si perspective.

For an intuitive understanding of the prior paragraph, consider a typical color selection UI which isn't just a list of standard colors, but the entire spectrum from red to purple, light to dark:
color-selector-editor.png


The Ni approach is analogous to saying "that color" and clicking the one spot on that grid and sliding the shading bar on the right to just the right shade. Below this UI, there are a bunch of boxes that list the intensity of each of Red, Green and Blue, with specific values from 0-255. [The Hue, Sat, and Lum values are a dependent set of values that describe the same color as the Red, Green and Blue values - a completely different definition in a different frame, describing the same thing, and in fact map directly to the horizontal, vertical and sidebar positions of the cursors. Very Ni.;)] This list of values is analogous to the Ti/Si definition of color. So Ni wants to adjust the perspective such that it is a slightly lighter shade of lavender, but over in Si-data-point land, it involves tweaking each color definition by a very fixed and precise amount, say Red +2, Blue -3 and Green +4. So the Ni perspective will see a very simple tweak that "makes everything work out", but this involves changing all three definitions of which the INTP is keeping careful track.

Thus it can require a lot of feedback between both parties to achieve both the proper definitional agreements and perspective agreements. Once the agreements are achieved, then the ideas tend to bounce around between the two far more cooperatively..

Great illustration and *sigh* all too true, I think.
 
S

Sniffles

Guest
Having observed many INTJ/INTP conversations about complex theoretical topics, I've noted that the INTP will work toward finding common definitions (Si), while the INTJ will work toward finding a common frame or perspective (Ni). This can work out badly (or, more likely, just require a LOT more work) in those cases where the Ni perspective involves several very-slightly-different definitions from a given standard Si perspective.
That's a very good way of putting it. As a Ni-dom, I often have difficulty giving precise definitions for complex concepts, and instead focus more on a proper paradigm on which to best understand the concept in question. This happens a lot when I'm asked to define something like religion, and I often note the difficulty in doing so since there's so many variations of it. Or even currently my discussions concerning definitions of fascism in the generic sense.
 

rav3n

.
Joined
Aug 6, 2010
Messages
11,655
Well you're gonna have disconnects with anybody. Even people of your own type can get on your nerves. It's just all about recognizing the differences and working through them because you understand them because you know their type.
True but we've kind of shifted away from the point of processes happening in a vacuum or not.
These are only the negatives. From my experience,They have a really hard time deciding on things or their Ne is so ingenious and brilliant ideas that its the best way. As a result, they will bulldoze others with Fi and Te to get their way.
Same goes for ENTJs. We both have fix it mentalities.
 

Thalassa

Permabanned
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
25,183
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sx
These are only the negatives. From my experience,They have a really hard time deciding on things or their Ne is so ingenious and brilliant ideas that its the best way. As a result, they will bulldoze others with Fi and Te to get their way.

It's sadly true. Then people who don't know much about function theory wanna call you a J cuz you know how to bulldoze.
 

Thalassa

Permabanned
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
25,183
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sx
True but we've kind of shifted away from the point of processes happening in a vacuum or not.

That "shifting away" is probably what annoys Ni about Ne. You know, that, and Ne doms just being so unpredictable at times, especially when very young.
 
R

ReflecTcelfeR

Guest
I think the shifting away is the whole point of conversations (I mean finding new vantage points to solve problems, whether they are immenent, or potiental). It seems like when you shift away you can eventually figure out the answer to the orignal question and you have provided yourself more opportunities (Naive answer?) once your immediate question has been answered. I do agree that shifting topics without guidance by other functions makes it illogical and uncondusive for communication purposes, but I'd say shifting is for progress, always moving forward as quickly as possible.
 

Thalassa

Permabanned
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
25,183
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sx
I think the shifting away is the whole point of conversations (I mean finding new vantage points to solve problems, whether they are immenent, or potiental). It seems like when you shift away you can eventually figure out the answer to the orignal question and you have provided yourself more opportunities (Naive answer?) once your immediate question has been answered. I do agree that shifting topics without guidance by other functions makes it illogical and uncondusive for communication purposes, but I'd say shifting is for progress, always moving forward as quickly as possible.

I think it's the whole point of conversations, too.
 

uumlau

Happy Dancer
Joined
Feb 9, 2010
Messages
5,517
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
953
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
That "shifting away" is probably what annoys Ni about Ne. You know, that, and Ne doms just being so unpredictable at times, especially when very young.

Ni and Ne both "shift away" but in different directions. Ne is more obvious, going to other ideas/concepts/things outside of oneself, and is also often expressed openly. Ni is less obvious, working in a space of changing frames and perspectives, and keeping silent until a new idea is mostly understood.
 
R

ReflecTcelfeR

Guest
I relate Ne to space and Ni to time, is that a good division of the two?
 

uumlau

Happy Dancer
Joined
Feb 9, 2010
Messages
5,517
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
953
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
I relate Ne to space and Ni to time, is that a good division of the two?

I've done that before, and did so in the post that the OP partially quoted. It's a decent analogy.

In a more mathematical metaphor, I think of Ne being real numbers and Ni being imaginary numbers. Thus Ne is aware of the current reality, while Ni is aware of the hidden variables that make things tick. Ni often ends up being "timelike" because that "make things tick" is often close to being literal, that because one treats the visible state as an initial position and velocity, as it were, and thus "sees" the path that will be followed. Such functions are often of the exp(i(k*x - omega*t)) wave form, where the imaginary part of the way is still in there, mathematically, and only only measures the "real part".
 
R

ReflecTcelfeR

Guest
I like the real numbers and imaginary numbers comparison, thank you.
 

Thalassa

Permabanned
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
25,183
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sx
Ni and Ne both "shift away" but in different directions. Ne is more obvious, going to other ideas/concepts/things outside of oneself, and is also often expressed openly. Ni is less obvious, working in a space of changing frames and perspectives, and keeping silent until a new idea is mostly understood.

Ni sure does keep silent. I find it's oddities delightful, though. I love subtle, weird Ni humor and sometimes it's incredibly insightful.

Like I mentioned before, the only problem I can forsee is ENxPs thinking INxJs are uptight, and INxJs thinking ENxPs are crazy, but I don't know if that's got anything to do with Ne/Ni or if that's just about ExxP and IxxJ interaction styles.
 
Top