Why is it difficult to describe Ni?

[iwakar]

This whole thing is the chicken or the egg. With the answer being in where you spend most of your time. Gathering, or synthesizing. I tend to gather quickly, and synthesize slower. Due to the amount of information I need.

I can really relate to this. The realizations are rapid, but deciding how I'm going to implement the new information is gradual.

 

[ThatGirl]

Is that the best you can do?

Lol, That was a segmented portion of my post Jag!

It tied in with the rest you know.

 

[Fidelia]

I've heard someone say that Ni can recognize what something isn't, even if it can't describe what it is. What are your thoughts on that? Accurate or no?

 

[ThatGirl]

I've heard someone say that Ni can recognize what something isn't, even if it can't describe what it is. What are your thoughts on that? Accurate or no?

My only analogy for this, is when I say (and I have spoken about this before) listen to a piece of music and see the missing melody.

The conceptualization of Ni, I would say does allow for seeing what is there as well as what is not there.

I always attributed that to my ability to see the whole, or what makes something complete.



This is sheer personal experience, it may be different for others.

 

[uumlau]

How does Se play a role in this? On what criteria is the function or meaning determined? How is "context" identified?


---

1k posts. woot.

Congratz on 1k.

In my analogy, the criteria are the type(s) and order(s) of arguments submitted to the function. So, for instance, in C#, Convert.ToString(<arg>) can take an integer, and turn it into "1" or "3" or whatever integer it is, or a boolean, and turn that into "true" or "false", or a double (floating point), and give a decimal string representation, and so on. On one level, it's totally obvious what each kind of variable should turn into in string form, but in practice, each is a different transformation. So the same intuitive reasoning that says the integer one should be "1" and the decimal three point one four one five nine should be "3.14159", is how Ni feels about other intuitive transformations: that it's obvious that "1" is one, and so on and so forth. Of course, this is a simple, obvious transformation, but think about how sophisticated it really is, when each argument is a very different type, that while numerically we know 1.0 is the same as 1, but the floating point number 1.0 is NOT the same as the integer 1. There's a lot of unseen processing that goes one behind the scenes in order to preserve the meaning of Convert.ToString() so that it does the "common sense" operation. Ni does that same kind of unseen processing, preserving meaning, even as context and usage change.

 

[Arclight]

Apologies for sounding a little harsh I just know that the idea of a limitless imagination makes no sense to me...but I didn't realise [when I was typing that message up] that other people wouldn't see it that way. Bubbles are, after all, quite flexible.

Thank you.. It's possible that the imagination has limits, but then here is the kicker.. because.. "nothing is impossible if it can be imagined".
That could cause one heck of paradox.
I understand that up to this point our lives know more limitations than possibilities in general.
But every now and then a great leap is made just because someone used imagination.
It its the single most powerful source of creativity we know.. I like to believe that our potential knows only the limits that we ourselves, will chose to put on it. This could be wrong.. But when you consider that in the grand scheme of things, humanity is still in it's infancy.. Then the possibilities seem endless from that stand point, even there is an actual limit.

My biggest fear is that, we also have a great capacity for destruction. Thus, we will make ourselves extinct before we ever got to where we can get to, to find out if there is a limit, or not.

 

[uumlau]

Symbolism was everything to Jung and his entire body of work which spanned more than 60 years. It's not as if it's a secret that only a select few know. Some have even speculated Jung was INTJ. My, how "repellant."

You asserted that an aversion to symbolism indicates that a person is "the last person on earth with a preference for Ni." I replied that your conclusion doesn't follow and pointed out an exception. Your rebuttal appears to assume that you only need point out an exception, when in fact you need to demonstrate that the exception cannot be true, or otherwise make a positive argument for the necessity of an affinity for "symbolism".

The only alleged INTJ you can speak for, uumlau, is yourself. Not 10, 20 and certainly not "most." If symbolism doesn't appeal to you, personally, that's fine. To think you can claim what most INTJs would find "repellant" is a bit pretentious. For the record, there are INTJs with Literature and Psychology degrees. Symbolism, and understanding it well, plays a large role in both.

It doesn't have to be most. In fact, you say it's fine if I don't, not that I'm especially averse to symbolism. Rather, I can see an INTJ (including myself, not being averse to symbolism per se), being repelled by certain kinds of symbolism, and speaking in gross generalities about hating all symbolism. All I need is one xNxJ expressing disgust at sloppy reasoning based on symbolism.

As far as INTJs in this forum, you're not going to catch Z, who is an INTJ, taking an anti-symbolism stance.

Again, your counterexamples don't demonstrate your original point nor disprove mine.

I note that your quotations mention symbols in a few places, but it is but a part of the whole, not the entirety.

FWIW, I respect your opinion on the matter of symbolism, and yes, it's one of many aspects of Ni; I just happen to disagree with your particular generalization that I pointed out. I would think you'd be the last person to assert that kind of black and white litmus test for typological analysis.

 

[Arclight]

About symbols.. What are words?? Symbols for abstract and concrete concepts.. Symbol is a symbol for symbol..

About knowing what something is not.. This is great way to define things. It can just be very tedious and long.. since there are so many things that something is not and only one thing that something is.

Just saying.. carry on

 

[uumlau]

I've heard someone say that Ni can recognize what something isn't, even if it can't describe what it is. What are your thoughts on that? Accurate or no?

I think this is typical of any of the four introverted functions. Fi knows what doesn't feel right. Ti knows what isn't logical. Si knows what isn't real. Ni knows when the wrong meanings have been ascribed, or the wrong approach is being made to a problem. All of these are subjective opinions, not genuine truth, but for the introverted function user, it's ingrained and difficult not to trust the assumptions being made.

 

[Jaguar]

You asserted that an aversion to symbolism [....]

My post was in response to your comments to TG where you mentioned her Ni or something to that effect. Frankly, if she didn't have XNtJ in her profile at this time, I'd bet a c-note you never would have said a word about Ni.

And I stand by my comments. I don't think someone who prefers Ni is going to say this:

Is it just me, or is it possible that I could be an S.....
I fucking hate "symbolism".
Sometimes I forget that, but sure enough, that thought keeps popping in my mind.
Assigning greater meaning to things or events is fucking annoying.

Nowhere in her quote are these words you posted:

Fuzzy-wuzzy touchy-feely symbols

I still don't know why you posted those silly words.

FWIW, I respect your opinion on the matter of symbolism, and yes, it's one of many aspects of Ni; I just happen to disagree with your particular generalization that I pointed out. I would think you'd be the last person to assert that kind of black and white litmus test for typological analysis.

In your prior post, you claimed to know what "most INTJs" would find "repelling" but I'm the one who made a generalization? You're certainly an amusing guy.

RELIGIOUS SYMBOLISM AND PHYSICS

If some joker is comparing religious symbolism and physics on the net, some INTJs better run.

 

[uumlau]

I still don't know why you posted those silly words.

What? Ni symbolism doesn't tell you? For shame!

 

[Jaguar]

I still don't know why you posted those silly words.

What? Ni symbolism doesn't tell you?

Sure it does:

 

[onemoretime]

I think this is typical of any of the four introverted functions. Fi knows what doesn't feel right. Ti knows what isn't logical. Si knows what isn't real. Ni knows when the wrong meanings have been ascribed, or the wrong approach is being made to a problem. All of these are subjective opinions, not genuine truth, but for the introverted function user, it's ingrained and difficult not to trust the assumptions being made.

I'd say that the introverted functions manifest more like this:

Fi: knows when something isn't morally sound
Ti: knows when something isn't internally consistent
Si: knows when something doesn't feel right (or familiar)
Ni: knows when you're looking at something the wrong way

 

[uumlau]

I'd say that the introverted functions manifest more like this:

Fi: knows when something isn't morally sound
Ti: knows when something isn't internally consistent
Si: knows when something doesn't feel right (or familiar)
Ni: knows when you're looking at something the wrong way

I like these.

 

[ThatGirl]

My post was in response to your comments to TG where you mentioned her Ni or something to that effect. Frankly, if she didn't have XNtJ in her profile at this time, I'd bet a c-note you never would have said a word about Ni.

And I stand by my comments. I don't think someone who prefers Ni is going to say this:

Actually the reason he decided to recognize my post as Ni was because it was simply a reiteration of his previous post regarding Ni. Notice the question mark at the end of the second paragraph. I was trying to make sure I understood correctly.

The Ni he was recognizing there was his own idea.

That is why I started writing in terms of my own personal experiences.

And I agree I don't have a particular preference toward N anything, doesn't mean it isn't still my dominant function.





.........*grabs C-note and runs out the back door*

 

[Jaguar]

And I agree I don't have a particular preference toward N anything, doesn't mean it isn't still my dominant function.

You have no idea what a dominant function is.
And I agree with Z:

You're not an INTJ, that's for damn sure.

 

[onemoretime]

And I agree I don't have a particular preference toward N anything, doesn't mean it isn't still my dominant function.

What you're missing is what it means to have a function be dominant. It's not whether you have a particular preference. It's that the function's influence on your perception is so strong, and its approach to problems so familiar to you, that it affects your life experience in two preeminent ways.

First, you have no clue whatsoever that you prefer this function. I still have no freakin' clue what Ne is, how it shades my perception of the world, how it feels, etc. That's because there is nothing in my experience to compare it to. Nothing is as pervasive in my life.

Second, until you mature quite a bit, you have no idea that the way others experience things can be radically different from your own. Your dominant function, as far as you understand, defines what it means to be human, or to be more precise, what makes humans what they are. As far as I understand it, the different perspective are as follows:

Ne: to be human is to understand what is wonderful about everything in the world
Ni: to be human is to know that what is and what seems to be are usually two very different things
Se: to be human is to appreciate everything that is beautiful about this world
Si: to be human is to know the difference between right and wrong

Fe: to be human is to take joy in everyone around you, and to share that joy with others
Fi: to be human is to constantly seek the meaning of things
Te: to be human is to remake the world for the better
Ti: to be human is to understand how everything fits together

 

[ThatGirl]

I disagree.

 

[Jaguar]

As well you should.
I will say this - using his criteria, all 8 are my "dominant functions."

 

[onemoretime]

I disagree.

Of course you do.

As well you should.
I will say this - using his criteria, all 8 are my "dominant functions."

Of course they are. You grew up and are an adult now, after all.