• 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.

Why is it difficult to describe Ni?

Athenian200

Protocol Droid
Joined
Jul 1, 2007
Messages
8,828
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
4w5
I don't regard Ni as mysterious, but it's still kind of hard to describe. My personal description, how I spot it in others, is that 1) there is a focus on "meaning" as opposed to "definition" and 2) there is a tendency to remember things in terms of functionality/action as opposed to name/title. These properties tend to be regarded as "just knowing" and "tapping into the unconscious" because meaning and functionality are highly abstract and don't immediately translate into words. Ni perceives certain things as "obvious" because it sees the "real meaning" and "functionality", and it is often puzzling when others don't see the same "obvious" things.

That's interesting. It kind of reminds me of when I forget commonly used words in the middle of a conversation, and end up saying something very confusing instead.

For instance, I once forgot the word "paper," and had to tell someone that I needed more "stuff that holds printed words." Another time, I forgot the word "doorknob," and had to tell them that the "room accessing lever" didn't work. It's really embarrassing when that happens, but I wonder if the fact that I would describe what I was talking about in that way gives a clue into how Ni works... because those are basically the ways in which I see those objects. In terms of what they do, what function they perform, rather than as concrete things with a static nature. It took people a while to figure out what I meant, but they usually did.

Or is that different from what I'm talking about?
 

uumlau

Happy Dancer
Joined
Feb 9, 2010
Messages
5,517
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
953
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
Wouldn't INTPs and ENTPs also categorize things in terms of their function as opposed to their name or title? Isn't Ne also responsible for "seeing between the lines"? So how would you identify Ti+Ne from Ni?

Actually, both INTPs and ENTPs tend to be very nitpicky with their definitions. In Ne mode, they play with ideas and bounce them around, but in the end, everything is classified and categorized in an "Si" sort of way: if you say something doesn't fit into their logical Ti+Si universe, they don't know what you mean, because your literal meaning is illogical. You'll know you've hit that point when you say something eminently sensible, and they start pointing out the logical fallacies they perceive to you. INxJs on the other hand will quickly figure out what you're getting at, even if you can't say it that well. This latter tendency can go to far, of course, to the point of "writing between the lines" and assuming you meant something that you'd never mean in a million years.

I should note that Ne sees patterns that Ni doesn't see. If you give both a metaphorical stack of magazines, Ne will spread them all out and arrange them in a huge pattern, and once arranged, the pattern becomes obvious. Ni will instead remove the spines of all the magazines and stack them up and shuffle all of the pages. When encountering a problem to solve, Ni will "magically" pull out the right articles and sections of articles relevant to the problem and solve it that way.
 

Thisica

New member
Joined
Feb 19, 2011
Messages
383
MBTI Type
NiTe
Enneagram
5w4
That's interesting. It kind of reminds me of when I forget commonly used words in the middle of a conversation, and end up saying something very confusing instead.

For instance, I once forgot the word "paper," and had to tell someone that I needed more "stuff that holds printed words." Another time, I forgot the word "doorknob," and had to tell them that the "room accessing lever" didn't work. It's really embarrassing when that happens, but I wonder if the fact that I would describe what I was talking about in that way gives a clue into how Ni works... because those are basically the ways in which I see those objects. In terms of what they do, what function they perform, rather than as concrete things with a static nature. It took people a while to figure out what I meant, but they usually did.

That's what happens to me. Upon further reflection, though, I realised that my entire family seems to have the same problem :(
 

uumlau

Happy Dancer
Joined
Feb 9, 2010
Messages
5,517
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
953
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
That's interesting. It kind of reminds me of when I forget commonly used words in the middle of a conversation, and end up saying something very confusing instead.

For instance, I once forgot the word "paper," and had to tell someone that I needed more "stuff that holds printed words." Another time, I forgot the word "doorknob," and had to tell them that the "room accessing lever" didn't work. It's really embarrassing when that happens, but I wonder if the fact that I would describe what I was talking about in that way gives a clue into how Ni works... because those are basically the ways in which I see those objects. In terms of what they do, what function they perform, rather than as concrete things with a static nature. It took people a while to figure out what I meant, but they usually did.

Or is that different from what I'm talking about?

Yeah, it's the same thing. Now take it a step further.

You remember: "room accessing lever" or perhaps "room opening thing". Suddenly, if the means of opening the door isn't a KNOB, you know what functionality to look for. Sometimes the door slides. Sometimes it lifts up like a garage door. Sometimes it automatically opens like at the grocery store. Sometimes it has a combination lock. Sometimes there is a remote control. This is how Ni looks at the world and all of these means are the "same thing," while Si is stuck looking for a doorknob that might not be there. (This is an exaggerated metaphor to demonstrate differences in styles of thinking; any intelligent person of whatever type can figure out how to open a door!)

By seeing the world in terms of functionality, it looks very different than how the world looks in terms of names and labels and concrete items. This allows Ni doms in particular to make connections between things and ideas in a way very different from most other people, whose concrete assumptions prevent them from seeing otherwise "obvious" Ni truths.
 

Such Irony

Honor Thy Inferior
Joined
Jul 23, 2010
Messages
5,059
MBTI Type
INtp
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
Actually, both INTPs and ENTPs tend to be very nitpicky with their definitions. In Ne mode, they play with ideas and bounce them around, but in the end, everything is classified and categorized in an "Si" sort of way: if you say something doesn't fit into their logical Ti+Si universe, they don't know what you mean, because your literal meaning is illogical. You'll know you've hit that point when you say something eminently sensible, and they start pointing out the logical fallacies they perceive to you. INxJs on the other hand will quickly figure out what you're getting at, even if you can't say it that well. This latter tendency can go to far, of course, to the point of "writing between the lines" and assuming you meant something that you'd never mean in a million years.

This is really interesting. I think I'm more like the 'nitpicky' xNTP who can be over literal witih definitions. I know I have a hard time with people who sloppy in their verbal expressions of ideas and explanations of things and use strange terminology. I'll think they mean something else or won't quite understand what they're getting at. I do the Ni INxJ thing from time to time in that sometimes I can figure out what they're getting at with little info but I think this skill is something I've developed from experience, which in that case isn't really very INxJ.
 

INTPness

New member
Joined
Jan 22, 2009
Messages
2,157
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
I should note that Ne sees patterns that Ni doesn't see. If you give both a metaphorical stack of magazines, Ne will spread them all out and arrange them in a huge pattern, and once arranged, the pattern becomes obvious. Ni will instead remove the spines of all the magazines and stack them up and shuffle all of the pages. When encountering a problem to solve, Ni will "magically" pull out the right articles and sections of articles relevant to the problem and solve it that way.

Out of curiosity (and to better understand how Ni works), how is this method "advantageous" to the Ni user? For instance, in reading your description, I can see how the Ne method is advantageous - if I arrange everything in a logical pattern, then the information is laid out in an organized, easy to understand, easy to access way - at least it seems that way to me when I do it. And when I first begin the process of organizing the information, that's exactly what I'm thinking, that's my goal: I'm going to organize this information in a way that is easy to understand and easy to access - rather than having it scattered "all over the place".

In ripping off the spines and shuffling all the pages together, it "seems" (to me as an Ne user) like you are just mixing everything up and making certain pages difficult to find and difficult to access. But, it obviously makes sense to the Ni user or else they wouldn't do it. Maybe you can help us understand why they would do it that way and why they see it as beneficial. Or, maybe it doesn't work that way? Maybe it's just, "I don't know why we do it, I just know that it works well for us"?

Interesting topic.

Not to get off topic, but to continue comparing/contrasting Ni with Ne, I did find helpful the idea of "stale chips giving an image of things degrading, such as stepping on snow". I'm trying to come up with a counter-example for Ne. It's just constantly making connections and "linking things together". Always connecting the dots between what it's perceiving currently and what "could possibly be". Like someone can make a simple statement such as, "what the people of this country are lacking is something to be passionate about" - and then Ne just goes into overdrive and starts thinking of how that basic statement could be the basis for an entire book ---> what the chapters would discuss ---> how the book would be organized ---> what types of people (what segment of the market) would want to buy the book ---> what the cover of the book would look like ---> what the optimum selling price would be, etc. And if Ne really gets carried away ---> oh yeah, 2 of my friends are writing books at the moment ---> maybe I should start a small publishing company of my own ---> I could have all 3 books printed and marketed under my own company, etc, etc.

Or, this happens all the time (maybe it's more Ti then Ne), someone will say something to me and I will immediately go, "3 years ago, you made a statement to me that completely contradicts what you just said." And they won't even remember it themselves. They'll often say, "I said that 3 years ago? No I didn't!" It's like Ti has all this data stored on a hard drive (or maybe that's Si), but Ne can link it all together very quickly even if it's 3 years or 15 years apart.
 

cascadeco

New member
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
9,083
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
9w1
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
INTPNess, just a thought, but my initial thought is that removing the spines and external structure / initial/original organization allows for new, spontaneous re-orgs. It's not restricted to the original organization, and in fact depending on the situation or the context/perspective, novel orgs could be done on the spot. For example, page 5 from book A could be inserted in place of the original page 22 from book B. In other words, page 5 isn't *limited* or constrained to simply being associated with Book A. It could be incorporated into many other books. New associations. i.e. the location of the page is not terribly relevant, it's how it can get tied or used in other settings/ with other books. Hence the spines are not necessarily and the pages can be shuffled around and re-combined in different ways. Does that make sense?

That is, if I'm understanding uumlau's analogy correctly.
 

uumlau

Happy Dancer
Joined
Feb 9, 2010
Messages
5,517
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
953
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
That is, if I'm understanding uumlau's analogy correctly.

You are, my dear! :)

Out of curiosity (and to better understand how Ni works), how is this method "advantageous" to the Ni user? For instance, in reading your description, I can see how the Ne method is advantageous - if I arrange everything in a logical pattern, then the information is laid out in an organized, easy to understand, easy to access way - at least it seems that way to me when I do it. And when I first begin the process of organizing the information, that's exactly what I'm thinking, that's my goal: I'm going to organize this information in a way that is easy to understand and easy to access - rather than having it scattered "all over the place".

In ripping off the spines and shuffling all the pages together, it "seems" (to me as an Ne user) like you are just mixing everything up and making certain pages difficult to find and difficult to access. But, it obviously makes sense to the Ni user or else they wouldn't do it. Maybe you can help us understand why they would do it that way and why they see it as beneficial. Or, maybe it doesn't work that way? Maybe it's just, "I don't know why we do it, I just know that it works well for us"?

Interesting topic.

Cascadeco has it. In reality, it doesn't become a "framework of knowledge" but rather "just knowledge." Imagine a whole bunch of self-help articles that deal with various aspects of the human condition. Now imagine that there is a particular individual to whom I am moved to offer advice. The person might have issues with dating or a gf, and perhaps his Mom is being annoying, and then there's the situation at work. Ni takes all the articles covering these topics even tangentially, then snips out the bits and pieces that apply to this guy right here, and then synthesize it with a particular theme that doesn't come from any article, but from "just me."

For instance, the theme might be "just relax," and I explain how that will help with the gf situation (too uptight to risk anything), the Mom situation (she only cares about you, accept her input without feeling pressured to act on it), and the situation at work (just do one thing at a time, instead of everything at once.).

The result is a custom-tailored answer perfect for the situation at hand. It is problematic in that the answer cannot easily be generalized, because it is very particular to that one case.

That's how Ni works.

Not to get off topic, but to continue comparing/contrasting Ni with Ne, I did find helpful the idea of "stale chips giving an image of things degrading, such as stepping on snow". I'm trying to come up with a counter-example for Ne. It's just constantly making connections and "linking things together". Always connecting the dots between what it's perceiving currently and what "could possibly be". Like someone can make a simple statement such as, "what the people of this country are lacking is something to be passionate about" - and then Ne just goes into overdrive and starts thinking of how that basic statement could be the basis for an entire book ---> what the chapters would discuss ---> how the book would be organized ---> what types of people (what segment of the market) would want to buy the book ---> what the cover of the book would look like ---> what the optimum selling price would be, etc. And if Ne really gets carried away ---> oh yeah, 2 of my friends are writing books at the moment ---> maybe I should start a small publishing company of my own ---> I could have all 3 books printed and marketed under my own company, etc, etc.

Or, this happens all the time (maybe it's more Ti then Ne), someone will say something to me and I will immediately go, "3 years ago, you made a statement to me that completely contradicts what you just said." And they won't even remember it themselves. They'll often say, "I said that 3 years ago? No I didn't!" It's like Ti has all this data stored on a hard drive (or maybe that's Si), but Ne can link it all together very quickly even if it's 3 years or 15 years apart.

Yeah, Ni-Te isn't known for its consistency. Also, it's possible that, yes, you remember the exact words he used way back when, but you lack his internal Ni context, which was using slightly different definitions then than he does now. One of the more common issues between INTJ and INTP is that INTP harps on INTJ "inconsistencies" which are merely just definitions that aren't exactly shared, mostly because Ni "plays with the definitions" so as to better understand things. Really Ni is just "slightly adjusting a single idea" but in INTP-land, this can be the equivalent of rewriting physics with all of the laws slightly different and broken ... except if Ni is correct (which it is, sometimes), then the "rewritten" laws are "more correct" and not merely "good enough" for the situation at hand.
 

rav3n

.
Joined
Aug 6, 2010
Messages
11,655
Ni plays with reality, twisting and turning it, upside-down and inside-out. You can see the product of it clearly when Ni-doms are being playful and create imaginative snapshots.
 

INTPness

New member
Joined
Jan 22, 2009
Messages
2,157
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Ah, yes, I see what you all are saying. Cascadeco - stripping off the "organization" or the original structure so that the information can be used however the user wants to use it at a given time. Interesting. Thanks for that.

It sounds like Ni users take in all the information and then are able to cut-and-paste it or piece it together in whatever ways it needs to. That reminds me of something I heard about Dr. Martin Luther King that I didn't know. Maybe he was Ni-dom (I read recently that he was very much an introvert, contrary to popular belief. Many of his closest friends described him as introverted and very introspective). Anyhow, during his "I have a dream" speech, he had a different speech organized and he began down the path of that speech - as planned - and he got well into the body of that speech (not the "I have a dream" speech, but the other one). The crowd was listening, but they weren't "electrified". It was just another speech. Suddenly, a woman (I forget her name) - she was a friend of his who was on the stage with him - she said really loud (apparently you can hear her say it in the audio), "Tell them about your dream, Martin!" Witnesses say that when he heard her say that, he stopped in his tracks, thought for a second, then moved his speech notes off to the side of the podium, completely switched gears, and immediately went into his electrifying "I have a dream speech" - which had already been given at another previous time.

A friend of his said something like, "He was an absolute master at 'cutting and pasting' from previous speeches. At any given time, he had the ability to - right in the middle of his speech - to stop and insert a paragraph from an earlier speech if he thought that it fit the current context and the current audience." And that's what he did. As if his Ni (?) heard the woman and intuitively knew that this particular crowd, at this particular moment needed to hear "the dream speech". So, he switched gears - as you said, he took "page 5 from speech A" and inserted into "page 21 of speech B". And that's what made the speech famous - because he switched gears and got it right. That was exactly what that particular audience needed to hear on that day and they connected with his words. It's gotta be Ni, you think?
 
G

Glycerine

Guest
People think MLK was generally a NFJ (disagreement over the first letter).
 

Arclight

Permabanned
Joined
Nov 5, 2009
Messages
3,177
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
6w5
Ni... For those who don't "get it".. Life is what you make it (You'd be surprised how far you can go with this.. Good or bad.) The truth is in here. Nothing + nothing still equals something, something + something still equals nothing. There is always one more perspective.. find it. Speak to the universe and listen.. It answers you.

This works for me.. intuitively..
 

cascadeco

New member
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
9,083
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
9w1
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
^ Uh, lol... sorry, I doubt that's going to help in the understanding. ;) Even for me, I tend not to view my processes in those sorts of terms/mysticisms!!
 

rav3n

.
Joined
Aug 6, 2010
Messages
11,655
How about this, cascadeco? Ni appears to magically pull a bunny out of a hat but what's not seen, is the hole in the bottom of the hat that leads to the rabbit warren! :laugh:
 

amazingdatagirl

New member
Joined
Aug 3, 2010
Messages
95
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
6w5
I should note that Ne sees patterns that Ni doesn't see. If you give both a metaphorical stack of magazines, Ne will spread them all out and arrange them in a huge pattern, and once arranged, the pattern becomes obvious. Ni will instead remove the spines of all the magazines and stack them up and shuffle all of the pages. When encountering a problem to solve, Ni will "magically" pull out the right articles and sections of articles relevant to the problem and solve it that way.
I thought that this example was kinda lame at first but am starting to like the analogy.

In this example, Ne treats the objects (magazines) in their entirety. There is truth to be found both within the individual instance and in their contextual relationships. What type of magazines do I have? Anything rare or collectible? Where did they come from? Why did uumlau dump them on my desk (as if I don't have enough work piled up already)? That April 1973 Popular Mechanics looks interesting. The software bug that I was working on can probably wait (will only take 5 minutes to fix it)...

The Ni-dom cuts the pages apart (glances over them) and the stack goes in a corner. Boss comes in a couple of weeks later and asks for your input on application development for smart phones. You reach over to the stack (about 1/3 the way from the top) and pull out an article about trends in handheld computing.

Ni is concerned about functionality. Useful information is extracted and extra stuff (advertising, classifieds, op-ed) goes in the trash. Ti-Ne wants to understand (and enjoy) the intuitive connections that are inspired by the objects. Utility is less important.

Oops, missed this while I was composing my post (Ti nitpicky-ness)
The result is a custom-tailored answer perfect for the situation at hand. It is problematic in that the answer cannot easily be generalized, because it is very particular to that one case.

That's how Ni works.
 

Arclight

Permabanned
Joined
Nov 5, 2009
Messages
3,177
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
6w5
^ Uh, lol... sorry, I doubt that's going to help in the understanding. ;) Even for me, I tend not to view my processes in those sorts of terms/mysticisms!!

Well That's Ni for you.. apparently it has no form, only interpretation :)

What I am saying seems very simple to me.. :shrug:
 

cascadeco

New member
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
9,083
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
9w1
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Well That's Ni for you.. apparently it has no form, only interpretation :)

What I am saying seems very simple to me.. :shrug:

My point is really that that sort of description is WHY no one really 'gets' Ni and we have all of these sorts of discussions. How you describe it may be how you see it, but it's utterly unhelpful for anyone else. It doesn't say much of anything. I mean no offense, but it's why most people just scratch their heads and don't get it.
 

Arclight

Permabanned
Joined
Nov 5, 2009
Messages
3,177
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
6w5
My point is really that that sort of description is WHY no one really 'gets' Ni and we have all of these sorts of discussions. How you describe it may be how you see it, but it's utterly unhelpful for anyone else. It doesn't say much of anything. I mean no offense, but it's why most people just scratch their heads and don't get it.

Are you saying it's an issue with my language or concepts??

Also if the title of this thread is "why Ni is so difficult to understand".. My post illustrates this point quite well.. No?
Mysticism, symbolism and metaphor are part of the package.
 

cascadeco

New member
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
9,083
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
9w1
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Are you saying it's an issue with my language or concepts??

Ni as a cognitive function, being a cognitive function, should be able to be explained in a way that makes sense and that is NOT open to interpretation. As a function, Ni IS something. It processes and works in a certain way. To try to articulate that process is what most people want to know and want to understand - how it works, what it IS as a function. What we're actually DOING.

How we each experience it may vary a bit, and words we use to describe it may vary, but all Ni doms process in the same way.

What you described didn't explain the process itself. You say 'it's just intuitive', and 'speak to the universe and listen', but that doesn't say anything. And..lol... *I* don't even know what you mean when you're saying speak to the universe. Do you know what I mean? What are non-Ni-users supposed to gain from reading that statement? etc.
 
Top