Ni and detail orientedness

[Z Buck McFate]

^LOL. I totally didn't notice that. My whole post is a meta example of itself. Ha.

 

[Coriolis]

We notice the "important" details because we have a very definite understanding of how something "works." If we see evidence that would confirm or deny that "working", prove or disprove that internal Ni model of the Se world, those details pop out almost magically. We pay very close attention to those details without even realizing we are doing so.

It can be like putting together a jigsaw puzzle. Out of the sea of facts and details, those that fit the still-empty spaces immediately stand out.

The biggest thing is when they 1) critique of my ideas in front of others, 2) don't provide support for that critique when pressed for examples or facts to back it up and 3) don't offer a solution. It feels like they are just making potshots.

How typical is the highlighted of INTPs? My SO does this all the time (can't provide facts and examples), and it is one of the few things that just drives me round the bend.

 

[JocktheMotie]

How typical is the highlighted of INTPs? My SO does this all the time (can't provide facts and examples), and it is one of the few things that just drives me round the bend.

An analogy I can give is that similar to how INTJs may have some difficulty expressing Ni immediately before having to translate both the content and structure of the ideas and thoughts into something that can be understood by others, INTPs can have a similar difficulty in expressing their critiques; they'll hinge on highly general and almost instinctual, non-verbal understanding of how an idea just doesn't work structurally but can't really find "facts and examples" immediately. It's just not the direction their minds work, it's as though you're asking them to go from 5th gear into reverse. The gears are going to grind. They'll get around to it. Maybe

INTPs will probably just throw you a connected idea or similar context to show you why it won't work rather than some data set or facts anyways, since "facts and examples" aren't particularly important to them cognitively; they all just point back to deeper principles and structure so why bother.

 

[Mal12345]

They say that N's aren't interested in details. From what I've suspected, Ni seems to have a very keen interest in them, they bring all the details together to reach the one "true answer." No detail is unimportant- everything like goes into their reservoir of information. It seems like people who I suspect are Ni doms and auxs couldn't do what they do without some level of focus on the small things.

True or false? Elaborate.

I've kept your question in mind for the last two weeks (luckily this didn't go on for years). I've decided that the Ni detail-orientedness you refer to is an obsession over controlling the details (facts, figures, etc.) in order to squeeze out of them even the remotest possibility of an idea which may eventually further progress.

 

[chris1207]

They say that N's aren't interested in details. From what I've suspected, Ni seems to have a very keen interest in them, they bring all the details together to reach the one "true answer." No detail is unimportant- everything like goes into their reservoir of information. It seems like people who I suspect are Ni doms and auxs couldn't do what they do without some level of focus on the small things.

True or false? Elaborate.

False. They enjoy details that back up their conceptual distinctions. Being that most people are conceptual morons, Ni users go out of their way to juxtapose as many samples/examples as possible to convey their concepts. If they learned to articulate the dichotomies that Ni creates, they'd be able to translate and explain them for what they are rather than using examples.

Ni => Se and Se => Ni is also semiology. It's the correspondence between externalized arrays of sensory detail and complex underlying meaning. A simpler example would be the correspondence between the color green and the concepts of 'good' or 'going' (stop-light.) This is contrasted with the color red, which means 'alert' or 'stop'. It's worth pointing out that by complex underlying meaning I don't, necessarily, mean structurally complex but rather a complex of meaning distinctions. Because Ni is introverted it is binary, because it is binary it is nuanced and difficult to articulate. Less mature NJ's use examples because it's the most effective way of communicating to a world that is, primarily, filled with sensors.

 

[garbage]

Less mature NJ's use examples because it's the most effective way of communicating to a world that is, primarily, filled with sensors.

If examples are the most effective way to communicate, aren't they actually a pretty mature thing to use? What would be better--perhaps analogies and metaphors, or perhaps not worrying about communicating at all?

 

[Mal12345]

If examples are the most effective way to communicate, aren't they actually a pretty mature thing to use? What would be better--perhaps analogies and metaphors, or perhaps not worrying about communicating at all?

Agreed. I would think that explaining a concept to a Sensor using examples is a mature thing. But then, so is using concrete analogies and metaphors. The attempt to communicate is not exactly what I would call immature.

 

[redacted]

They say that N's aren't interested in details. From what I've suspected, Ni seems to have a very keen interest in them, they bring all the details together to reach the one "true answer." No detail is unimportant- everything like goes into their reservoir of information. It seems like people who I suspect are Ni doms and auxs couldn't do what they do without some level of focus on the small things.

True or false? Elaborate.

I mean, it's not like a person can just ignore details in general.

As a perceiving function, Ni takes input from the environment (which has some level of detail of course). But the function is focused on details/information relevant to the current abstract thought process.

Anyway, there's always gonna be an interplay between N and S. An Ni dom will just twist all the S stuff to fit in the N framework, throwing away details willy-nilly. At least that's what people tell me.

Edit: I recently ran into this dude from my high school that I hadn't talked to in 7-8 years. We were talking in a group for a minute or two and after I make a few comments he goes, "oh, there you go again -- oversimplifying and pretending neat little themes dictate everything." I had no idea how apparent this trait of mine has always been...

 

[rav3n]

Anyway, there's always gonna be an interplay between N and S. An Ni dom will just twist all the S stuff to fit in the N framework, throwing away details willy-nilly. At least that's what people tell me.

Willy-nilly? Not quite. Relevancy is defined by the Ni user.

 

[redacted]

Willy-nilly? Not quite. Relevancy is defined by the Ni user.

I just meant it probably looks willy-nilly to other people. The details I focus on all make perfect sense in my mind at least.

 

[chris1207]

If examples are the most effective way to communicate, aren't they actually a pretty mature thing to use? What would be better--perhaps analogies and metaphors, or perhaps not worrying about communicating at all?

Maybe I was just referring to myself. It's easy to juxtapose examples (S) to illustrate conceptual distinctions (Ni) than it is to outright interpret them (Ti) for me.

 

[Andy]

They say that N's aren't interested in details. From what I've suspected, Ni seems to have a very keen interest in them, they bring all the details together to reach the one "true answer." No detail is unimportant- everything like goes into their reservoir of information. It seems like people who I suspect are Ni doms and auxs couldn't do what they do without some level of focus on the small things.

True or false? Elaborate.

I think that all those attempts to attribute details/big picture thinking to a poticular function are misguided. I don't think the functions work like that. Ni is concerned with the need for certainty of understanding. That is, a strong Ni user feels a need to make sure they know what is happening, what might happen and why, before they feel comfortable making a decision. How much details is needed to reach a point were they feel they have achieved that level of understanding will vary from one person to the next. Actually, I prersonally feel that concocting some huge, sweeping theory without ever checking to see if it matches reality is foolish - but that is a outside function theory. It doesn't predict competance or common sense.

 

[Mal12345]

I don't have much more to add except to say that Ni detail-orientedness would have to involve a healthy relationship with its inferior Extraverted Sensing. Sensing does not direct the thinking process, on the contrary, sometimes it gets in the way of Ni creativity and so it must be kept under control. An Ni obsession with, or at least a great interest in, details arises from this. But they play a subservient role in the creative process, and sometimes they only play a trivial role in the Ni lifestyle, such as memorizing movie facts and other trivial matters. An intense interest in a challenging sensory puzzle such as a Rubik's Cube might develop.

 

[entropie]

When your head runs big your greatest fear is missing on a detail. Especially when building a circuit or mechanical device, just the forgetfulness of one small detail can provoke a chain reaction that does destroy the whole effort in a second. This fear can turn into obsession, I know it first hand

 

[redacted]

Actually, I prersonally feel that concocting some huge, sweeping theory without ever checking to see if it matches reality is foolish - but that is a outside function theory.

It actually isn't. Introverted functions constantly check for internal relevance at the cost of external relevance and vice versa. Checking for external relevance is outside the scope of introverted functions by definition.

But I agree with the rest of your point.

 

[Mal12345]

When your head runs big your greatest fear is missing on a detail. Especially when building a circuit or mechanical device, just the forgetfulness of one small detail can provoke a chain reaction that does destroy the whole effort in a second. This fear can turn into obsession, I know it first hand

That's one major reason why I never got into that kind of profession or hobby.

 

[Thinkist]

Maybe I was just referring to myself. It's easy to juxtapose examples (S) to illustrate conceptual distinctions (Ni) than it is to outright interpret them (Ti) for me.

And as an ISTP, it's just the reverse: I build up to Ni via Se rather than use Se to prove what "big picture" Ni may bring up like NJs do.

I wonder if this applies to other SPs as well.

They say that N's aren't interested in details. From what I've suspected, Ni seems to have a very keen interest in them, they bring all the details together to reach the one "true answer." No detail is unimportant- everything like goes into their reservoir of information. It seems like people who I suspect are Ni doms and auxs couldn't do what they do without some level of focus on the small things.

True or false? Elaborate.

False. Sometimes even NPs may have a need to focus on details. It's just a different form of details (Si, rather than Se, which may seem a little haywire to the processes of an NP).

Here's how it works:
Se→Ni: details for the big picture, which is often fixed
Si→Ne: fixed details for the big picture, which often varies
In either case, one detail could change the big picture.

 

[entropie]

That's one major reason why I never got into that kind of profession or hobby.

You shouldnt ignore that option completly. When the device works later its better than porn / real woman (substitute for convenience )

 

[Mal12345]

You shouldnt ignore that option completly. When the device works later its better than porn / real woman (substitute for convenience )

I get that from computer repairs.