• 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.

Introverted Thinking's enemy

Haphazard

Don't Judge Me!
Joined
Apr 14, 2008
Messages
6,704
MBTI Type
ENFJ
I guess Ni and Ti can only work when one is deferring to the other (a la ISTP or INFJ) but would not be able to work together as equals (hence the usual friction between INTJs and INTPs).
 

nightning

ish red no longer *sad*
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,741
MBTI Type
INfj
Hmmm I think Ni and Ti can work together so long as one understands the need for the other.

The ISTP - INFJ is a good example. sometimes

As to the friction between INTJ and INTP. I will say you need to look into auxiliary functions.

INTJ - Ni Te
INTP - Ti Ne
Namely... Ni crashing into Ne and Ti crashing into Te. You don't get this with ISTP - INFJ.
 

Nocapszy

no clinkz 'til brooklyn
Joined
Jun 29, 2007
Messages
4,517
MBTI Type
ENTP
But what about when there is no friction between an INTJ and an INTP?

I've seen it happen. I've seen this pair talking to one another, yet having two different conversations.

With this I say Ni and Ti kind of just stay out of one another's way.

The INTJ might use some kind of a metaphor, I guess to allow Ni to do what it wanted while still presenting itself as if it were attending the same subject as the INTP who 'leads' the conversation more directly.
 

"?"

New member
Joined
May 2, 2007
Messages
1,167
MBTI Type
TiSe
Hmmm I think Ni and Ti can work together so long as one understands the need for the other.

The ISTP - INFJ is a good example. sometimes.
Yet since Ni and Ti are the teritiary for the two aforementioned, they would actually hold the types back, ie ISTP doesn't trust their intuition and INFJ finds analyzing a problem to be arduous. Again they both enjoy complexity, but will work through it differently with similar results.
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,187
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
My problems with Ni is that Ti needs a stable frame of reference in order to build something, while Ni automatically jerks the rug out from underneath -- "What you say, Ti, makes sense if you look at it from THAT angle... but what if you look at it from THIS angle?"

You build a house (Ti) in one dimension, the house does not exist if you bamf into a different one. Or the rules of nature that exist in one dimension might not exist or exist differently in a different one.

So Ni can easily *invalidate* any structure Ti creates, without offering anything in its place.

(This struggle was highly pronounced in faith/spiritual issues for me. I based on my faith on Ti thinking for a long time, despite some friction, but eventually stepped outside of the the assumptions I had needed to make in order to build that spiritual edifice and suddenly had NOTHING to stand on. Anything Ti built seemed arbitrary.)

So Ne helped Ti for the INTP to see connections and know "where to dig" ... but the inverse Ni says, "It doesn't matter what you dig up, there are endless meanings and so you cannot derive any true meaning from your finds."

There is ultimate reality that can be defined to some degree vs there is no ultimate reality, it's all a matter of what you're focusing on.

One way I use them together is to connect with or understand others. I can leap into the shoes of someone else (see the world through their framework = Ni) and then use Ti to immediately crunch through, based on the assumptions, the ramifications of their view. It's helpful that way. Ni is used to orient, then Ti is used to make sense of what I'm seeing.
 

Owl

desert pelican
Joined
Feb 23, 2008
Messages
717
MBTI Type
INTP
My problems with Ni is that Ti needs a stable frame of reference in order to build something, while Ni automatically jerks the rug out from underneath -- "What you say, Ti, makes sense if you look at it from THAT angle... but what if you look at it from THIS angle?"

You build a house (Ti) in one dimension, the house does not exist if you bamf into a different one. Or the rules of nature that exist in one dimension might not exist or exist differently in a different one.

So Ni can easily *invalidate* any structure Ti creates, without offering anything in its place.

(This struggle was highly pronounced in faith/spiritual issues for me. I based on my faith on Ti thinking for a long time, despite some friction, but eventually stepped outside of the the assumptions I had needed to make in order to build that spiritual edifice and suddenly had NOTHING to stand on. Anything Ti built seemed arbitrary.)

So Ne helped Ti for the INTP to see connections and know "where to dig" ... but the inverse Ni says, "It doesn't matter what you dig up, there are endless meanings and so you cannot derive any true meaning from your finds."

There is ultimate reality that can be defined to some degree vs there is no ultimate reality, it's all a matter of what you're focusing on.

One way I use them together is to connect with or understand others. I can leap into the shoes of someone else (see the world through their framework = Ni) and then use Ti to immediately crunch through, based on the assumptions, the ramifications of their view. It's helpful that way. Ni is used to orient, then Ti is used to make sense of what I'm seeing.

:cool:

I like the way you think.

Premise 1) "Ni automatically jerks the rug out from underneath -- "What you say, Ti, makes sense if you look at it from THAT angle... but what if you look at it from THIS angle?"

Premise 2) Ni says, "It doesn't matter what you dig up, there are endless meanings and so you cannot derive any true meaning from your finds."

Conclusion) So Ni can easily *invalidate* any structure Ti creates, without offering anything in its place.

But...

"There is ultimate reality that can be defined to some degree vs there is no ultimate reality, it's all a matter of what you're focusing on."

Ti reasserts itself with a vengence!

If it were impossible to derive true meaning, then even this statement would be meaningless. But, despite Ni's shennanigans, Ti asserts that at least one meaningful distinction can be made. What are the prerequistes that make this distinction possible, and, once they are in place, what are their implications?
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,187
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
"There is ultimate reality that can be defined to some degree vs there is no ultimate reality, it's all a matter of what you're focusing on."

Ti reasserts itself with a vengence!

If it were impossible to derive true meaning, then even this statement would be meaningless.

Sigh. I guess we can try to cover our trail, but the fingerprints and forensic evidence still remains.

I can use Ni, but it's not my natural frame ... Our basic approach to the problem is still always rooted in our natural perception/style of thinking. I'm still framing Ni within Ti, even while I'm saying Ti is constantly being encompassed by Ni.

Nice catch.

But, despite Ni's shennanigans, Ti asserts that at least one meaningful distinction can be made. What are the prerequistes that make this distinction possible, and, once they are in place, what are their implications?

I'll need more time to consider this, but if anyone else would like to take a shot at it... well, the more, the merrier. ;)
 

nightning

ish red no longer *sad*
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,741
MBTI Type
INfj
Yet since Ni and Ti are the teritiary for the two aforementioned, they would actually hold the types back, ie ISTP doesn't trust their intuition and INFJ finds analyzing a problem to be arduous. Again they both enjoy complexity, but will work through it differently with similar results.
Yes, that can happen. Hence my qualifier... "sometimes". ;)

Premise 1) "Ni automatically jerks the rug out from underneath -- "What you say, Ti, makes sense if you look at it from THAT angle... but what if you look at it from THIS angle?"

Premise 2) Ni says, "It doesn't matter what you dig up, there are endless meanings and so you cannot derive any true meaning from your finds."

Conclusion) So Ni can easily *invalidate* any structure Ti creates, without offering anything in its place.
From the Ni dominant perspective, it's a given that there's is no sensible way you can analyze something from every angle. Therefore you must derive the truth from patterns you see based on the angles you did look at. Perhaps that's the main difference between the use of Ni from INXJs compared to IXTPs. Trust in its use.


If it were impossible to derive true meaning, then even this statement would be meaningless. But, despite Ni's shennanigans, Ti asserts that at least one meaningful distinction can be made. What are the prerequistes that make this distinction possible, and, once they are in place, what are their implications?
I'll be waiting to hear the answers from the IXTPs.
 

Wolf

only bites when provoked
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
2,127
MBTI Type
INTJ
I like working with Ti Ne people because they come up with lots of stuff for me to work with. As long as they have faith in my Ni to discern whether it will work, and trust when I try to use Te to explain my Ni, it usually works really well.

Besides, they understand my sense of humour and usually have a better one than I do.
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,187
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
From the Ni dominant perspective, it's a given that there's is no sensible way you can analyze something from every angle. Therefore you must derive the truth from patterns you see based on the angles you did look at. Perhaps that's the main difference between the use of Ni from INXJs compared to IXTPs. Trust in its use.

?

But how do you know when you have looked at enough patterns?

That the patterns you have seen are representative of the infinite number of patterns possible?

Is there a way to do that, or is that just a personal choice?
 

nightning

ish red no longer *sad*
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,741
MBTI Type
INfj
?

But how do you know when you have looked at enough patterns?

That the patterns you have seen are representative of the infinite number of patterns possible?

Is there a way to do that, or is that just a personal choice?

You know you've looked at enough patterns when the same pattern starts appearing in front of you time and time again.

No, there's no way to proof that what you've seen is "enough" in that it encompass everything. But it is good enough in explaining most things. Don't sweat over the little things. The basic pattern can be known... the exceptions are just that, exceptions.
 

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
@ all the talk about Ni taking the rug out from under Ti.

for me, Ti can make a conclusion, and Ni just stores it away as an analysis of ONE perspective. then it sends Ti another perspective, which Ti analyzes and Ni stores away. Ti works for Ni, shining light on one frame of reference at a time.

it's not useless at all. even an Ni dominant has to choose a frame of reference when talking to people. the thing for me is, Ti is like Ni's employee. it doesn't have the most important job, but it does a ton of support work.

it's not like Ni dominants sit around all day without being able to stay in one perspective for more than a second.
 

the state i am in

Active member
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
2,475
MBTI Type
infj
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
My problems with Ni is that Ti needs a stable frame of reference in order to build something, while Ni automatically jerks the rug out from underneath -- "What you say, Ti, makes sense if you look at it from THAT angle... but what if you look at it from THIS angle?"

You build a house (Ti) in one dimension, the house does not exist if you bamf into a different one. Or the rules of nature that exist in one dimension might not exist or exist differently in a different one.

So Ni can easily *invalidate* any structure Ti creates, without offering anything in its place.

exactly! they don't fit together when Ti wants to pay extremely detailed attention within ONE SCALE, take time, and understand how things relate in a slow and methodical way, while Ni is zipping around flip-flopping between different perspectives, different levels of scale, focus, etc. it can be a little spastic and we just need to slow down and hear what Ti has to say, it takes its time for a reason. yet Ni is about global thinking, and we've already rushed to many conclusions immediately based on our well-honed conceptual instincts, Big Picture, theoretical framework, metaphorical domains, etc... it can be a very productive pairing, but each side has to listen to the other more than it usually finds enjoyable.
 

mlittrell

New member
Joined
Sep 3, 2008
Messages
1,387
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
9w1
first off, i think we should ignore functions. but thats for personal reasons. i think they complicate things and i think the only thing they are good at explaining is WHY the temperaments (and types) are what they are but nothing else.

second, i think if that were true then it would also have to be true that Te and Ne also would not work well together. this, of course, is not true. function order now comes into play. Ti and Ni cannot be in close proximity by definition of how functions work together. there must be something in between. lets take the INFJ. their function order would be Ni, Fe, Ti, Se. there is a barrier, the Fe, that the Ti filters through. so in a sense it is correct that Ti and Ni do not work together because naturally they cannot filter into each other being that there is some sort of buffer in between. also, one is a perceiving function and the other is a judging function so they are just on other planets to begin with. this brings me back to my original point on why we shouldn't use functions. i truthfully just made that up. i have no idea if its true. i didn't read it anywhere. its complicated. it barely makes sense (that could be my fault). it also doesn't explain anything at all in terms of the INFJ or any other personality we may be talking about. if we stuck to temperaments i think we would find that they explain quite a bit more and in a much simpler way.

"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler."

Albert Einstein
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,187
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
second, i think if that were true then it would also have to be true that Te and Ne also would not work well together.

Would it?
That's an interesting leap.

Ne still works within particular dimensional constraints; Ni does not. Ne is probably far more suited to work in conjunction with other functions in order to implement something, Ni has a different goal.
 

mlittrell

New member
Joined
Sep 3, 2008
Messages
1,387
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
9w1
pardon, Ne and Fe

and for the personality you may substitute whatever you see fit. it should still make sense within the given example

and my overall point was the quote at the bottom
 

BlackCat

Shaman
Joined
Nov 19, 2008
Messages
7,038
MBTI Type
ESFP
Enneagram
9w8
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
second, i think if that were true then it would also have to be true that Te and Ne also would not work well together.

NeTe works just fine for me actually. They don't conflict, since they are developed for me.

I often get a lot of crazy ideas, but when I put some rational thought into the ideas then they can sometimes be adjusted to be a reality through Te. A good example of this is when I am thinking of possibilities, I will get an idea and then I will slosh it around in my mind to see if it actually makes sense and if it's applicable.

EDIT: Oh I just saw your other post. But yeah.
 

Cenomite

Systematic chaos
Joined
Nov 30, 2008
Messages
623
MBTI Type
ENTP
I'm working on a project with an INTJ friend of mine. So we have a Ti secondary working with an Ni primary.

It does cause a few problems because we always see completely different solutions to problems, and constantly need to explain to each other what our ideas are like and where those ideas came from. There are some disagreements about which direction to take things in terms of problem solving a lot, and neither of us are usually 100% clear on what the other is envisioning.

Once we get on the same page though, it's a pretty powerful combination. So far, it's the best and most efficient team I've worked on (if you can count 2 people as a team). Between the two of us, there's not much (if anything) that doesn't get figured out
 
Top