• 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

Tamske

Writing...
Joined
Oct 22, 2009
Messages
1,764
MBTI Type
ENTP
To me, the biggest Ne/Ni conflict is like this:

Ni: there are possible problems ahead! Prepare for them!
Ne: who says these problems will occur and not other ones? If there are any problems, we'll solve them on the spot. Now, what about *insert fun thing*?

I see the introverted perceiving functions as being of a more "judger" character, in the sense that they will help you to plan things; while the extraverted perceiving functions are the improvising on the spot ones.
 

Kalach

Filthy Apes!
Joined
Dec 3, 2008
Messages
4,310
MBTI Type
INTJ
So what is Ne anyway?

Here's where I'm at with Ni...

First off, Ni is a process. It begins with possibility. One speculates on answers to questions like "What could this mean?" And formally speaking the answers could be anything at all. Since the questioning is conducted away from environmental roots, nothing objective stands in the way. "This" could be a rainbow, it could be yo momma, it could be the key to all things, it could be a shoe. But this is neither informative nor interesting. One isn't in the middle of the process just to kill time. One does look for conceptual richness in one's "possible" answer to the original question. It's more interesting.

So now we're past the beginning, into the middle. It began with a possibility. It continues with revision of that possibility. One asks, "Where could this fit?" Fitting a possibility is the examination of the concepts that make it. Testing them. One assumes that other functions are making an appearance here. But speculation is a feature of this testing too. Speculation to destruction. Pushing the boundaries of the conception until they fail. And that is what the final concept is made of, speculation bounded by contradiction.

Where and how did this conceptual construction take place? Against what was it really built? Where was the creativity? In the inner world there is what seems to be limitation. Seed knowledge is sometimes a rarity. Outside information is sometimes a necessity. One should open up and let a few things in, sometimes.

But only sometimes.


So, what is Ne? One assumes...

It begins with the world. One assumes it is a process of conceptualization too. One assumes the form of the world as it is encountered in the moment prompts recall or introduction of other forms. Details of other, initially unconnected, situations are introduced and connections made. The purpose is to reinvent and re-figure. To re-envision. Changing the referents of the current situation so they recall other situations gives higher meaning to the mundane. More content is granted. One assumes it applies not just to situations but to events and details within situations. Such events may include hearing another person say something, seeing them do something, reading something... thinking something. The creative aspects lies in how far away and how fast the connections can be made. The purpose is understanding. Reconfiguring what happens as something else accretes if not meaning then at least content.

The process is objective. The connections may be wild and formally far distant from the source, but that they can be made is a product of recognition of inherent pattern that can't be changed.



Or is it something else?
 

CrystalViolet

lab rat extraordinaire
Joined
Oct 24, 2008
Messages
2,152
MBTI Type
XNFP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Hmm, discussion such as these much me wonder if I'm ENFP.
Kalach, your Ne definition seems right, sort of. I'm not sure that the underlying framework is a permenant fixture, because that too can be adjusted and tweaked with new information. Ne to me has evolutionary aspects to it...or maybe I just misunderstood you completely, It really is truly flexiable, it's not until it's sifted intially by si that it gains any form and then it's refined by Fi/Ti. It's not always a quick process either, some times little bits of information sit on the edge of consciouness, for months, some times years, before it's fed through the thought processing machine. It's very liquid process.
 

Amargith

Hotel California
Joined
Nov 5, 2008
Messages
14,717
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
4dw
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
My problem with 'seeing' the Ni perspective is often that they go off scouting a rabbit hole and I'm like..wait..which one of em did you dive into?!! I see about 100 rabbit holes..and you just assume that I'll know which one you're in coz you see only one (or only one relevant one), and I'm left going wtf! And start digging up all possible rabbit holes going 'Marco!' hoping to god I can hear your 'Polo!' :doh:

Once I get where you're going though, I have no problem following your lead and seeing what you're seeing. It sometimes can take ages to find you though and I really don't always have that energy/patience :alttongue:

Learn to explain why this rabbit hole and properly indicate the rabbit hole you end up jumping into. Thank you ever so much :coffee:
 

Kalach

Filthy Apes!
Joined
Dec 3, 2008
Messages
4,310
MBTI Type
INTJ
Would that there could be some actual description of intuition extroverting. Then I wouldn't have to make up my own. And I did wonder in particular if "inherent pattern that can't be changed" would get questioned.

For the sake of, oh, I don't know, novelty, let us make a distinction between how a function succeeds at doing what it does and how it presents. How it presents seems to be easy to describe: "OMG, it's fulla starz intuitions." But how does (a person in the throes of) it do what (s/he/)it does? I'm going to go ahead and assume that objectivity is an important characteristic, indeed is a key mechanism.

Exactly what pattern a person abstracts from (what just happened in) the environment is, to some degree, up to them, their experience, and their knowledge, but it would seem that the pattern has structure. And that structure can be "seen" repeated in abstractions from other times/places/books/thoughts/whatever. There are objective points of congruence. Thus the meaning of the current situation/event/thing amplifies. But what point was chosen for attention, what pattern, and indeed what aspect of what pattern... that varies, it changes, and develops. Evolves, if you will. And probably the evolution depends on changes in the situation. Which changes can (and will) be prompted by the seeker of insight herself.

Or some damn thing like that.




And booyah, "frameworks" is lobbed right back into the Ne court, though perhaps several months too late.
 

uumlau

Happy Dancer
Joined
Feb 9, 2010
Messages
5,517
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
953
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
My problem with 'seeing' the Ni perspective is often that they go off scouting a rabbit hole and I'm like..wait..which one of em did you dive into?!! I see about 100 rabbit holes..and you just assume that I'll know which one you're in coz you see only one (or only one relevant one), and I'm left going wtf! And start digging up all possible rabbit holes going 'Marco!' hoping to god I can hear your 'Polo!' :doh:

Once I get where you're going though, I have no problem following your lead and seeing what you're seeing. It sometimes can take ages to find you though and I really don't always have that energy/patience :alttongue:

Learn to explain why this rabbit hole and properly indicate the rabbit hole you end up jumping into. Thank you ever so much :coffee:

Ne sees lots of different rabbit holes all over the place. Ni sees one rabbit hole with a lot of different descriptions.

Thus Ni is probably diving into a rabbit hole right under your nose that you hadn't spotted, because your assumptions don't allow it to exist.

Had I mentioned that Alice in Wonderland and Though the Looking Glass are very "Ni" stories?

For example:
Humpty Dumpty in Through the Looking Glass said:
'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.'
 

Jaguar

Active member
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
20,647
Thus Ni is probably diving into a rabbit hole right under your nose that you hadn't spotted, because your assumptions don't allow it to exist.

I'm such a picky bastard regarding Ni descriptions, but that one I can definitely get on board with.
It's excellent.
 

Poki

New member
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
10,436
MBTI Type
STP
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Ne sees lots of different rabbit holes all over the place. Ni sees one rabbit hole with a lot of different descriptions.

Thus Ni is probably diving into a rabbit hole right under your nose that you hadn't spotted, because your assumptions don't allow it to exist.

Had I mentioned that Alice in Wonderland and Though the Looking Glass are very "Ni" stories?

For example:

Yes, I noticed this applies heavily to Ni users and interacting with ENFP types.
 

Amargith

Hotel California
Joined
Nov 5, 2008
Messages
14,717
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
4dw
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Yes, I noticed this applies heavily to Ni users and interacting with ENFP types.

Explain! :alttongue:


And Uumlau, the least you can do is take me with you down that rabbit hole, instead of assuming I'll find it on my own *sulks*
 

InvisibleJim

Permabanned
Joined
Nov 19, 2009
Messages
2,387
Intuition is intuition regardless of attitude; you just won't find Ni leaving little flag poles at the rabbit holes as Ne does. Of course, we do leave our Te forms open to others.
 

uumlau

Happy Dancer
Joined
Feb 9, 2010
Messages
5,517
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
953
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
And Uumlau, the least you can do is take me with you down that rabbit hole, instead of assuming I'll find it on my own *sulks*

I did. You just assumed I was wrong, or joking, or telling a fanciful tale, or that I meant a rabbit hole you could see. That's the problem with assumptions. I can't take you if I don't know which assumptions of yours make the rabbit hole invisible to you. Should I know which assumptions to drop, and I tell you to drop them, then you react as if destroyed the world, when all I've done is try to bring you to a new world.

Ni is traveling through all the possible hypothetical (parallel) worlds, even as it seems focused on a single point in this world, while Ne is traveling everywhere possible in this world. Ne needs to let go of this world (however briefly) to see the parallel Ni worlds. Ni needs to focus on this world in order to see where Ne is going.

Happily, it really isn't that hard for either of us to change gears, and share visions between Ne and Ni; it's just rare to meet others who truly challenge us to do so.
 

Amargith

Hotel California
Joined
Nov 5, 2008
Messages
14,717
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
4dw
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Hehe, actually, I was talking in general :)
I do get where you're coming from and I love seeing your side of things, but yeah, in general, I've found that Ni-users tend to forget to take along their passengers. And yeah, it takes me a while to realize where I'm at when I'm trying to see your pov...especially what way we're exactly going and where we came from, as you guys do the opposite thing from us :alttongue:

It's interesting you guys look at it that way. If I'dve made that metaphor I'dve said that Ne-users visit all possible worlds out there but only look at their surface area, whereas Ni-users turn this world inside out and upside down, turning it into a maze for all their passengers to follow, but definitely also finding some interesting facts along the way :)
 

skylights

i love
Joined
Jul 6, 2010
Messages
7,756
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
have we mentioned the conflict of Ni users sounding really pretentious sometimes?
cause that's the one that gets me
:doh:

(not aimed at anyone or any post - inspired by a stuck-up Ni user IRL)
 

Kalach

Filthy Apes!
Joined
Dec 3, 2008
Messages
4,310
MBTI Type
INTJ
It's interesting you guys look at it that way. If I'dve made that metaphor I'dve said that Ne-users visit all possible worlds out there but only look at their surface area, whereas Ni-users turn this world inside out and upside down, turning it into a maze for all their passengers to follow, but definitely also finding some interesting facts along the way :)

I get the possible worlds idea for Ne. Tweak this, change that, stick to a worldly structure, and there's the possibility. The thing we're attending to right now could be like this other thing in this other worldly other world. And, Shazaam, we have the meaning of the thing and therefore some content to be going on with. But I don't get the turning it into a maze thing for Ni. Could it be that Ni stuff is maze-like because it determinedly does not maintain world-like structure? Included in the Ni content are no (obvious) points of reference signalling which possible world the possibility came from, and this makes it mysterious?

But all N works by leaps and bounds, and these leaps and bounds aren't formally random. So how does Ne not seem maze-like to Ne people? By what leap of content do you make your connections?
 

Kalach

Filthy Apes!
Joined
Dec 3, 2008
Messages
4,310
MBTI Type
INTJ
Example: NTPs have ruined philosophy.

The western conceptual analysis version of philosophy is so dominated by NTP style cogitating that one can actually identify large chunks of philosophical and logical tradition with cognitive functions.

Even possible worlds can be found in philosophical logic. Freaking Alvin Plantinga if not invented them, then at least popularised them. They're used for working out such esoteric philosophical problems as free will and the existence of god. And he has NTP beard,

220px-Alvin_Plantinga.jpg


so let's just take it for granted that possible worlds are an Ne thing, shall we? Good.

Okay. As far as I recall from undergrad philontpeee, possible worlds by themselves aren't that special. One requires some bridge between worlds. It was a semantic operator? I forget. But possible worlds make an appearance in semantics for logic anyway, and there needs to be some... what, I forget? Degree of similarity between worlds? Degree of syntactic similarity?

Bah, whatever!

Anyway, see? The objective element linking possibilities.
 

Tamske

Writing...
Joined
Oct 22, 2009
Messages
1,764
MBTI Type
ENTP
So what is Ne anyway?
Here's where I'm at with Ni... [...]
So, what is Ne? One assumes... It begins with the world. [...]
Or is it something else?
This is more or less how I understand them, too. Ne isn't that objective, though. It's a colored view of the world, mixed up with associations, experiences, worldview,... For real, untainted observations you need Se.

If I study or try to solve a problem, I usually use lots of scrap paper or build a model - a real-life one, not a mental model. I'm more productive at writing when I use a pen and paper. Ne works both ways, linking between the inside and the outside world. An observation can set off an association chain, like: Yellowstone sulphurous pools are impressive - if I ever need a description of hell - and what if you get lost in such a landscape and the only movement you see comes from vapour and bubbling mud - ...
So can an inside prompt (maybe by Ti?): I don't understand the Coriolis laws for moving reference frames - draw some of them - still don't see it - in which plane was this angle, again? - build a 3D model - ...
I think Ne is creative rather than bent on understanding. The "trying to understand" part comes from Ti. A Ne-Fi combo will get other sorts of ideas. More artistic, maybe, or symbolic? Finding meaning behind the facts?

Ni users (Kalach?): do you build mental models rather than real-life ones? Do you understand things without drawing or sounding them out?
The description of "possibilities" seems to me a very accurate one. Like a tree branching out to all sorts of scenarios and the branches intertwined after a while. Does it get too complicated after a while? To me, it does very often. I get lost among possibilities if I don't cut it off. Or, if I really want to get some view, I need to list them either on paper or by telling them to somebody... so by using the outside world as a sounding board... by using Ne instead of Ni.
 

Kalach

Filthy Apes!
Joined
Dec 3, 2008
Messages
4,310
MBTI Type
INTJ
This is more or less how I understand them, too. Ne isn't that objective, though. It's a colored view of the world, mixed up with associations, experiences, worldview,... For real, untainted observations you need Se.

If I study or try to solve a problem, I usually use lots of scrap paper or build a model - a real-life one, not a mental model.

To make an external, concrete focus point?

Hmmmm, mental models.... probably. Staged externalisation of ideas, such as, say, posting theories on a forum, helps a lot. It satisfies some requirement that when left unaddressed tends to block productivity. But I know this primarily to be extroverted thinking (with a little bit of extraverted sensing thrown in). Does it read like the regurgitation of some pre-formed model? Then I guess there was some modelling going on somewhere.

I think Ne is creative rather than bent on understanding. The "trying to understand" part comes from Ti. A Ne-Fi combo will get other sorts of ideas. More artistic, maybe, or symbolic? Finding meaning behind the facts?

That's interesting. And fits with N being perception, not judgment. But of particular interest is this "creative". One description of Ne has it that Ne users suggest associations to others (or themselves) to see what will come of them. But what's being created?
 

Tamske

Writing...
Joined
Oct 22, 2009
Messages
1,764
MBTI Type
ENTP
To make an external, concrete focus point?
Yes, that's true. You can argue there's Se peeping around the corner, but why not? The whole process of understanding consists of going from concrete/particular/examples/practical to abstract/general/theories and back again.

Hmmmm, mental models.... probably. Staged externalisation of ideas, such as, say, posting theories on a forum, helps a lot. It satisfies some requirement that when left unaddressed tends to block productivity. But I know this primarily to be extroverted thinking (with a little bit of extraverted sensing thrown in). Does it read like the regurgitation of some pre-formed model?
No, not really. But why not? Even primarily Ni users are allowed to construct models while discussing :) I always thought of NiTe as "this behavior will get me to my goal, even if you don't see it yet" while NeTi = "let's explore a forest of ideas and see which ones make sense".

That's interesting. And fits with N being perception, not judgment. But of particular interest is this "creative". One description of Ne has it that Ne users suggest associations to others (or themselves) to see what will come of them. But what's being created?
Ideas. Mostly bogus ones, which are fun but not necessarily used. That's where the judging functions come in: they take on the "good" ones and stop the impossible ones from being executed (not always if Ne is your dominant :) which results in those unfinished projects).
 

Amargith

Hotel California
Joined
Nov 5, 2008
Messages
14,717
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
4dw
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
I get the possible worlds idea for Ne. Tweak this, change that, stick to a worldly structure, and there's the possibility. The thing we're attending to right now could be like this other thing in this other worldly other world. And, Shazaam, we have the meaning of the thing and therefore some content to be going on with. But I don't get the turning it into a maze thing for Ni. Could it be that Ni stuff is maze-like because it determinedly does not maintain world-like structure? Included in the Ni content are no (obvious) points of reference signalling which possible world the possibility came from, and this makes it mysterious?

But all N works by leaps and bounds, and these leaps and bounds aren't formally random. So how does Ne not seem maze-like to Ne people? By what leap of content do you make your connections?

I actually never claimed that Ne doesn't make 'mazes'. But it feels more like running ahead of you and you getting lost, vs Ni sticking close by but using trap doors that they conveniently forget to share the info on. I have just as much trouble following ENTPs, maybe even more, even though we share Ne. But they make my head spin, and vice versa. In fact, even with fellow ENFPs, when you both go Ne-ing, unless you were in sync to begin with, it's a lost cause, coz they go exploring the world on the right and you go exploring the world on the left and hop around the next world without informing the other. Communication is key.

With Ni-users it's even more frustrating to me coz I can *feel* they're close by but there's like a trap door or a glass wall inbetween. I can see what they mean but I don't know how to sync up...and the longer I take, the more chances I have of getting trapped in this maze while they find their way and I'm stuck. There needs to be a sync-up in the beginning and it needs to be maintained..kinda like a rope connecting us. The thing is that the sync up is easier to get with fellow Ne-users, especially ENFPs as they share the same preferred perspective on the world, so it's easier to go, ok this is point 0, the starting point. With Ni-users I can feel like we have that ground then suddenly they go off and I'm like..I'm not sure we have the same starting point here!!!
 
Top