• 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?

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
I am not saying we should or shouldn't.. I am saying it is not. We strive for order and that is noble.. But we cannot deny something just because we cannot define it.

Okay, maybe I get where you're coming from.... You're saying the world we live in doesn't necessarily follow simple laws (which I disagree with but whatever), that personality is too complex to define simply, etc...

The way I look at it is that we're stuck in this world with a drive to explain (human nature). We may as well take the data we see and try to put it into coherent systems. That's what MBTI is. Since the goal of the system is to describe cognitive behaviors, we should come up with the most efficient definitions for the terms we use in these descriptions. If we DON'T have simple definitions, the functions are useless as two people can disagree about describing the same behavior.

Sure, the world is complicated. But so what? The point of language is description. We should do that as efficiently as possible. A good definition is one that describes something well in the least words possible.

Without chaos there can be no order.

To be honest, this means nothing to me. I have no idea how it's relevant either.

Feelings, intuitions, hunches and emotions defy logic..

How? The brain is a physical thing. Physical things follow physical laws.

There is always logic.

Defining them wont change their nature. That is a fallacy of conscious existence.
There is much more going on than meets the eye..and there is nothing "smoke and mirrors" and about it.

I have no idea what this means.
 
G

garbage

Guest
I am not saying we should or shouldn't.. I am saying it is not. We strive for order and that is noble.. But we cannot deny something just because we cannot define it.
Without chaos there can be no order.

Feelings, intuitions, hunches and emotions defy logic.. Defining them wont change their nature. That is a fallacy of conscious existence.
There is much more going on than meets the eye..and there is nothing "smoke and mirrors" and about it.

Nobody's trying to change or deny anything about the subject; we're just trying to understand it.
 

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
My personal experience with Ni is that it works like this.

I was having a conversation with a ventrillo member and analyzing their personality based on the picture of their hand submitted in the sexuality sub forum. I went into some detail. After being told I was fairly accurate, I was told I can not gather that type of information from a picture alone.

My response was, "Well it isn't just the picture alone. It is how you chose to pose your hand, the state of your fingers, the background, over all health, why you chose this photo to represent yourself as a hand, and when you chose to post it."

His response, "That is Ni."

Am I wrong?

Actually that's more Ne. It's based on things happening in the world.

An Ni user would probably have trouble giving reasons for their opinion. (Remember our last discussion about your type?)
 

iwakar

crush the fences
Joined
May 2, 2007
Messages
4,877
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I have looked at various threads through the intertubes, and also some of the references to MBTI-type stuff, but I am puzzled by this common feature of the function.

[Or perhaps I'm tricking myself into believing it's difficult, since I'm Ni-dom...:shrug:]

Functions can be tricky to describe at all, but Ni as a hero function seems very rare in the general population. Could it be as simple as that?
 

cascadeco

New member
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
9,083
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
9w1
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
My response was, "Well it isn't just the picture alone. It is how you chose to pose your hand, the state of your fingers, the background, over all health, why you chose this photo to represent yourself as a hand, and when you chose to post it."

His response, "That is Ni."

Am I wrong?


I think this is similar to what I posted a while back about everyday-Ni and having a pretty good read on a person - or at the very least, reasonable probabilities/hunches- based on very few details. Taking one thing and extrapolating from there what that would tend to *imply* about other aspects.

For example, I know one thing about a guy, and that's that he drives a high-end BMW. What I would take from that is, a) he either has a reasonable salary, which means he'd be at VP level or above or else sales / something more lucrative like that, in which case he either values the car itself and its technical specs, and/or recognizes that with the clientele he works with, owning a bmw would be 'necessary' to fulfilling his role/image in the way he thinks he needs to fulfill, b) or he's in a lot of ccard debt because he wants the bmw even though he can't afford it due to similar reasons for wanting it as in a, but for him it would be more tied to image/status, c)he probably also tends to spend exposable income in other similar veins, with more high-end purchases, d) probably has a large house, e) probably wears expensive clothes, f) probably works a lot and probably enjoys his work and thus doesn't devote huge amts of quality time to endeavors outside of work and such.... etc etc, you get the idea.

Now it goes without saying that in many ways these are just projections, but I would say reasonable ones, and of course certain 'projections' might be off. But I think this is general what Ni-ers do in a split second, when encountered with almost anything -- taking something and looking at implications / other things very likely that also tie into that initial one thing.

I realize this is taking something and extrapolating out to 'predict' other things, but as with the book analogy earlier, it's a similar concept imo - with the book and page-reshuffling, it was simply taking various seemingly unrelated things and tying them into a single truth.

My example seems kinda similar to yours, ThatGirl - the ony difference is that your example factors in many things to come to an idea, and mine took just one thing to project other things that are likely as a result.
 

rav3n

.
Joined
Aug 6, 2010
Messages
11,655
it was simply taking various seemingly unrelated things and tying them into a single truth.
To clarify so it doesn't sound like Ne, Ni fills in the blanks instead of relying solely on external information gathering.
 

cascadeco

New member
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
9,083
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
9w1
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
To clarify so it doesn't sound like Ne, Ni fills in the blanks instead of relying solely on external information gathering.

Yes, thank you. This is what I'm trying to say. So you might have a starting point that's external, but will fill in the blanks from there. (I mean, EVERY one is going to be receiving and utilizing external data to some degree in order to refine some of their internal processes -- Se and Te/Fe for INxJ's, for example. No one lives in a vacuum where there's no external data feeding in)
 

Arclight

Permabanned
Joined
Nov 5, 2009
Messages
3,177
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
6w5
Okay, maybe I get where you're coming from.... You're saying the world we live in doesn't necessarily follow simple laws (which I disagree with but whatever), that personality is too complex to define simply, etc...

The way I look at it is that we're stuck in this world with a drive to explain (human nature). We may as well take the data we see and try to put it into coherent systems. That's what MBTI is. Since the goal of the system is to describe cognitive behaviors, we should come up with the most efficient definitions for the terms we use in these descriptions. If we DON'T have simple definitions, the functions are useless as two people can disagree about describing the same behavior.

Sure, the world is complicated. But so what? The point of language is description. We should do that as efficiently as possible. A good definition is one that describes something well in the least words possible.



To be honest, this means nothing to me. I have no idea how it's relevant either.



How? The brain is a physical thing. Physical things follow physical laws.

There is always logic.



I have no idea what this means.

I know what you mean and I know what I mean.. make what you will of that, I guess .

I feel like a lot of people are missing the point that Ni is about "perspectives" and understanding more than your own, by incorporating other perspectives into a larger framework and accessing those perspectives while looking at your own.

No single perspective is the absolute truth, the more perspectives, the more absolute truth is uncovered..
However we are not a collective.

Here is a completely unrelated random thought??..

Every time you look in the mirror you are using Ni.. This is why every time you look at yourself you see something different. What I mean is.. Some days you think you look great while others you think you are average and yet on others, you find yourself to quite unpleasant to the eyes.
What if every time you look at yourself, you are actually seeing the emotional response to your features that someone else has felt??
What if your subconscious picked up that emotional response to your features, stored it and presented to you in the form of how you perceive your own reflection?

You might say I have quite the imagination.. But every single Ni description I have ever read contains the word "imagination".
 

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
I know what you mean and I know what I mean.. make what you will of that, I guess .

I feel like a lot of people are missing the point that Ni is about "perspectives" and understanding more than your own, by incorporating other perspectives into a larger framework and accessing those perspectives while looking at your own.

It's impossible to access a perspective that's "more" than your own by definition. But I know what you're saying -- I spend a lot of time trying to think of many different narratives to describe the same progression of events. I try to think of all the ways people could see that progression. But doing that IS my perspective.

No single perspective is the absolute truth, the more perspectives, the more absolute truth is uncovered..

I kinda disagree here. The "absolute truth" is basically inaccessible. We can only come up with systems based on our potentially faulty senses and biases.

However we are not a collective.

Here is a completely unrelated random thought??..

Every time you look in the mirror you are using Ni.. This is why every time you look at yourself you see something different. What I mean is.. Some days you think you look great while others you think you are average and yet on others, you find yourself to quite unpleasant to the eyes.
What if every time you look at yourself, you are actually seeing the emotional response to your features that someone else has felt??
What if your subconscious picked up that emotional response to your features, stored it and presented to you in the form of your own reflection?

You might say I have quite the imagination.. But every single Ni description I have ever read contains the word "imagination".

I have no doubt you're an Ni user.

Anyway, this all started because I defined Ne and Ni and you disagreed. Maybe you can give me a reason my definitions don't work.... Like, give me an example of something that's Ni that my definition wouldn't label Ni.
 
T

ThatGirl

Guest
My example seems kinda similar to yours, ThatGirl - the ony difference is that your example factors in many things to come to an idea, and mine took just one thing to project other things that are likely as a result.

Well for you it was a car, for me it was a picture.

Both happen upon a glance.

I just looked at the hand and instantly knew this was a sensitive, and artistic person, who was a bit of a perfectionist, and probably overly judgmental of others, though is likely to govern themselves by the same standards, and picky as hell, with an eye for detail.

Synthesize that information together, and you have a pretty good idea who the person is, and even more so, how they are likely to interpret certain situations. By this time, you are taking the next action, or making the next comment, you already have an idea of 1 of 3 ways the person will feel or act from that point. Each bit of information just re-tweaking the existing model into a bigger and bigger in depth understanding. Verifying much of what you already knew was true, and throwing out the parts that were just general assumptions. Then you have a complete perspective, and that ahh moment.

Thats when they say the next sentence..... and suddenly you realized the conversation has only progressed two sentences worth. Lol.

That is usually when I smile. And look at the person with utter amusement. They are like....what?

Thats how it works for me. If that isn't Ni wtf is it?



To clarify so it doesn't sound like Ne, Ni fills in the blanks instead of relying solely on external information gathering.

Yes
 

Arclight

Permabanned
Joined
Nov 5, 2009
Messages
3,177
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
6w5
It's impossible to access a perspective that's "more" than your own by definition. But I know what you're saying -- I spend a lot of time trying to think of many different narratives to describe the same progression of events. I try to think of all the ways people could see that progression. But doing that IS my perspective.



I kinda disagree here. The "absolute truth" is basically inaccessible. We can only come up with systems based on our potentially faulty senses and biases.



I have no doubt you're an Ni user.

Anyway, this all started because I defined Ne and Ni and you disagreed. Maybe you can give me a reason my definitions don't work.... Like, give me an example of something that's Ni that my definition wouldn't label Ni.

I did not "disagree" with you and I apologize if I came across as doing so.. Perhaps I also lack diplomacy at times and I seem to leave out pertinent information that I seem to assume people just know. I am learning my intention is not always nearly as clear as I would have hoped it was.
To me, I was suggesting that there might be more to it, is all..
 

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
I did not "disagree" with you and I apologize if I came across as doing so.. Perhaps I also lack diplomacy at times and I seem to leave out pertinent information that I seem to assume people just know. I am learning my intention is not always nearly as clear as I would have hoped it was.
To me, I was suggesting that there might be more to it, is all..

I hear ya. I didn't think your diplomacy was off or anything. Just wondering how my definitions can be better defined. If you have any ideas, I'd like to hear!

Edit: definitions defined :doh:
 
T

ThatGirl

Guest
I should add the other part of N that I experience is watching a bunch of things happening, and the motion of interactions become formless not assigned to any specific words people are saying. Then realizing, actually this is what the fuck is going on, through the ability to filter all the insignificant portions people get caught up in and see the foundational structure.
 

Virtual ghost

Complex paradigm
Joined
Jun 6, 2008
Messages
19,769
It can't be described since Ni is everything that can't be attached to any other function.


Is it about memories ? No
Is it aboout efficiency ? No
Is it about observing physical objects ? No
Is it about values ? No
Etc.......


So basically Ni is what is left when you define 7 "normal" function.
The problem with Ni is that it is extremly vague since there is nothing you can trull compare it with. It is not extroverted function so that you observe it on other people. Also it is not a introvered judging function like Ti or Fi that can be detected easily as well if you know where to look. Plus it is not some kind of a memory data bank you can rely upon.


So what that means ? It means that this function is not about physical world and it is not about judgment.


In other words the question why it is "So hard to describe Ni" is like the question
"How do describe something that does not have size, shape, color, location or purpose to the person that has never experianced or encountered something like that ?"


I mean it is not quite like this but I think this analogy shows very well a few roots of this problem. Especially since Ni is not that much about what you think but how you think. However this process is extremly unlinear so it is impossible to simply put it into words. Especially because the process has stared at your birth (or even before birth) what means that as a person that is strong in Ni can't explain their opinions properly since the person you are talking to doesn't have the decades of that process behind it. So there are really high chances that the person will take your words at the face value.


In my personal opinion these Ni hunches are exactly the consequence of this process. Since Ni sub-consciously reads the entire process in a blink and trows out the quick conclusion. However since the huge amount of data as been analyzed the hunch is often correct or at least it was not completly unfounded.


However since Ni is not closely related to anything in the real wrold it also frees "the uses" from that world. What is probably the main reason why Ni-doms are usually so detached from society , environment or perhaps even logic.


Another problem with Ni is exacly that it is a "way that you think" instead of "what you think". What means that I have a number of ways of looking at things.
I can have this visions/hunches, seeing thing from other persons perspective, mix unrelated ideas without any logic, watching what will be the long term cosequence of event x ...... etc. Or perhaps it can be a mixture of those abstract processes. (what is actaully the case most of the time)


What means that the ways of seeing things multiply with each other so you get perspectives like axb or axbxc or axbxd or axdxgxz or bxdxg ....... etc.

I know that this is abstract but try to think that a=hunch or d= seeing the outcome in the far future or g= seeing the battlefield from other persons perspective.
So when you get through all the combination you will realize that the number of possible perspectives is quite large even if you have only a few "elements".


What is probably the reason by NJs don't like definitions that much. Since with Ni things are much too fluid for some "concrete definitions"


Not to mention that this is only defining of perspective. So when you process the actually data the number of usually multiplies even further and that point you need to stop and start writing stuff since your mind will need a focus in external world to stabilize the observing process. Especially since many ideas and conclusions will be at the at the focus of your conscious briefly and if you don't catch them it is very likely that you will need to wait for days or even longer for that idea to show up again. You know that it was a good idea but you simply don't remember the idea.


The Ni process/approach is very useful in a lot of ways. However it is often not very paractical since most people don't understand it (even if they know about MBTI)
or it makes things a way too complex for practical use. So the only thing that will come out of the Ni user is pretty short and blunt opinion. What is because of two reasons: it would take too long to explain this complex/multi-dimensional concept and because often even the Ni user is not trully sure how he or she ended with this conclusion or opinion.


For example it took me about 2 hours to write this post since I have lost alot of good ideas and discriptions along the way. Since it took a while to reflect upon how my mind works. So it is quite possible that my view is not identical with how some other people see Ni. Even if I say that there is more to my Ni then it writes in this large post.
 

Arclight

Permabanned
Joined
Nov 5, 2009
Messages
3,177
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
6w5
I hear ya. I didn't think your diplomacy was off or anything. Just wondering how my definitions can be better defined. If you have any ideas, I'd like to hear!

Edit: definitions defined :doh:

:rofl1:

I am not sure .. I can't even define my own definitions. So I am not sure I am qualified to define anyone eles's
 

uumlau

Happy Dancer
Joined
Feb 9, 2010
Messages
5,517
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
953
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
The Ni process/approach is very useful in a lot of ways. However it is often not very paractical since most people don't understand it (even if they know about MBTI) or it makes things a way too complex for practical use. So the only thing that will come out of the Ni user is pretty short and blunt opinion. What is because of two reasons: it would take too long to explain this complex/multi-dimensional concept and because often even the Ni user is not trully sure how he or she ended with this conclusion or opinion.

One thing that I've noticed is that Ni can overexplain simple things, yet given something terribly complex, can give a simple explanation (via Te/Fe) that yields new understanding to others, though some might be nitpicky about the explanation's accuracy and completeness. E.g., there is nothing obvious about how to derive Newton's law of gravity from observation alone, as Newton did, but it's a very simple physical law with complex and far-reaching implications.
 

Arclight

Permabanned
Joined
Nov 5, 2009
Messages
3,177
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
6w5
It can't be described since Ni is everything that can't be attached to any other function.


Is it about memories ? No
Is it aboout efficiency ? No
Is it about observing physical objects ? No
Is it about values ? No
Etc.......


So basically Ni is what is left when you define 7 "normal" function.
The problem with Ni is that it is extremly vague since there is nothing you can trull compare it with. It is not extroverted function so that you observe it on other people. Also it is not a introvered judging function like Ti or Fi that can be detected easily as well if you know where to look. Plus it is not some kind of a memory data bank you can rely upon.


So what that means ? It means that this function is not about physical world and it is not about judgment.


In other words the question why it is "So hard to describe Ni" is like the question
"How do describe something that does not have size, shape, color, location or purpose to the person that has never experianced or encountered something like that ?"


I mean it is not quite like this but I think this analogy shows very well a few roots of this problem. Especially since Ni is not that much about what you think but how you think. However this process is extremly unlinear so it is impossible to simply put it into words. Especially because the process has stared at your birth (or even before birth) what means that as a person that is strong in Ni can't explain their opinions properly since the person you are talking to doesn't have the decades of that process behind it. So there are really high chances that the person will take your words at the face value.


In my personal opinion these Ni hunches are exactly the consequence of this process. Since Ni sub-consciously reads the entire process in a blink and trows out the quick conclusion. However since the huge amount of data as been analyzed the hunch is often correct or at least it was not completly unfounded.


However since Ni is not closely related to anything in the real wrold it also frees "the uses" from that world. What is probably the main reason why Ni-doms are usually so detached from society , environment or perhaps even logic.


Another problem with Ni is exacly that it is a "way that you think" instead of "what you think". What means that I have a number of ways of looking at things.
I can have this visions/hunches, seeing thing from other persons perspective, mix unrelated ideas without any logic, watching what will be the long term cosequence of event x ...... etc. Or perhaps it can be a mixture of those abstract processes. (what is actaully the case most of the time)


What means that the ways of seeing things multiply with each other so you get perspectives like axb or axbxc or axbxd or axdxgxz or bxdxg ....... etc.

I know that this is abstract but try to think that a=hunch or d= seeing the outcome in the far future or g= seeing the battlefield from other persons perspective.
So when you get through all the combination you will realize that the number of possible perspectives is quite large even if you have only a few "elements".


What is probably the reason by NJs don't like definitions that much. Since with Ni things are much too fluid for some "concrete definitions"


Not to mention that this is only defining of perspective. So when you process the actually data the number of usually multiplies even further and that point you need to stop and start writing stuff since your mind will need a focus in external world to stabilize the observing process. Especially since many ideas and conclusions will be at the at the focus of your conscious briefly and if you don't catch them it is very likely that you will need to wait for days or even longer for that idea to show up again. You know that it was a good idea but you simply don't remember the idea.


The Ni process/approach is very useful in a lot of ways. However it is often not very paractical since most people don't understand it (even if they know about MBTI)
or it makes things a way too complex for practical use. So the only thing that will come out of the Ni user is pretty short and blunt opinion. What is because of two reasons: it would take too long to explain this complex/multi-dimensional concept and because often even the Ni user is not trully sure how he or she ended with this conclusion or opinion.


For example it took me about 2 hours to write this post since I have lost alot of good ideas and discriptions along the way. Since it took a while to reflect upon how my mind works. So it is quite possible that my view is not identical with how some other people see Ni. Even if I say that there is more to my Ni then it writes in this large post.

This is the logical explanation of much of what I have been trying to say. I obviously lack the verbal organization that you have.
But I totally get every word of what you are saying.
 
Top