Introverted intuition

[á´…eparted]

The point I was making is that MBTI J is NOT just a result of Te/Fe, but a result of a whole mindset which includes Pi. The J outer personality comes from Je + Pi, not just Pi. This is probably why you see & agree with the below.

There are characteristics of MBTI "J" in Pi thinking. It's not just a result of Je.

I absolutely completely agree with this, and have been saying this for a long time actually. If you were to take the overall weight of my J and P functions, it's about even. Yet, when I take any type of test that measures out J, always my strongest, and very very strong at that. Yet, I am clearly a Pi dominant.

I am speaking in terms of IxxJ and IxxP types here just for clarity: I think a lot of it comes from the fact that Pi functions need to be filtered. Stand alone unprocessed, what they bring to the table is pretty much useless. The way in which they need to be processed is very J most of the time.

The inverse is for Ji functions. They are by their nature J oriented, but more or less useless (though not nearly as pronounced as it is with Pi functions) stand alone. Unlike Pi functions, it can be used, but it's often not. They need to be processed, and the way in which they are processed is inheriently very P.

Really, for introverted types, their primary function, while either P or J, actually shows up differently because of the needs of it. That's ultimately what shows up externally, because it's what introverts are trying to do, that ends up showing.

 

[OrangeAppled]

I think this description I have stolen from PerC might be of interest in this thread.



I think this description is a fair assessment, but what I find incredibly intriguing is the portion I have underlined. I never thought this would be a connection to a Cognitive Function, but I've always done this, and do this frequently. When I see new information or hear something important, I can actually "flag" that information and tell myself to recall it at a certain date, and it would indeed pop into my mind at the exact time I needed it (once I realized I could do this, I began thinking of things to remember when I lay on my deathbed, and now I'm worried what might surface there). I can tell myself in the morning that I need to get something done tomorrow morning, and I can and probably would forget about it for the rest of the day, but then come morning I would instantly recall it. To add to this, I had an interesting morning when I was running late for something and I was trying to remember what all I needed, and then everything I realized I needed popped into my head like a bombardment of information, and I knew exactly what needed to be done in what order to ensure that I reach the place on time. Anyone else resonate with this at all?

How would you distinguish this from introverted sensing?
They do a storing up of info also.
Kind of how Ti & Fi both create conceptual categories of sorts but in different ways & used to gauge very different things.

 

[Alea_iacta_est]

How would you distinguish this from introverted sensing?
They do a storing up of info also.
Kind of how Ti & Fi both create conceptual categories of sorts but in different ways & used to gauge very different things.

I'd assume it would be different in the fact that Ni flags information to be utilized in the future unlike Si, which might be more oriented to recalling things in the past to deal with the present (I assume this is a correct interpretation of Si).

Plus, the initial source doesn't list that detail under Si, so we can't be certain that it pertains to all Pi users.

 

[Werebudgie]

I think this description is a fair assessment, but what I find incredibly intriguing is the portion I have underlined. I never thought this would be a connection to a Cognitive Function, but I've always done this, and do this frequently. When I see new information or hear something important, I can actually "flag" that information and tell myself to recall it at a certain date, and it would indeed pop into my mind at the exact time I needed it (once I realized I could do this, I began thinking of things to remember when I lay on my deathbed, and now I'm worried what might surface there). I can tell myself in the morning that I need to get something done tomorrow morning, and I can and probably would forget about it for the rest of the day, but then come morning I would instantly recall it. To add to this, I had an interesting morning when I was running late for something and I was trying to remember what all I needed, and then everything I realized I needed popped into my head like a bombardment of information, and I knew exactly what needed to be done in what order to ensure that I reach the place on time. Anyone else resonate with this at all?

You know, I think do some version of the flagging thing. But in my case, it's not really conscious and deliberate like yours, and certainly I don't put a conscious future time stamp on it.

For me, it's more like certain information feels/looks/resonates as more vivid to me than the rest, and I'll register that at some level but not immediately pursue it. Then when the larger scale pattern or meaning gets clearer from more information and time, usually in more obvious ways, the vivid stuff will come back into my line of sight and proves useful. And what I mean by "vivid" is like something that's in color in a black and white context, or three dimensions in a two dimensional field, or it will kind of ring like a bell or otherwise resonate like sound (bass level) in some underneath way, and that vividness will get my attention and I'll mark it. If it doesn't have immediate relevance, I put it aside for later. I think I probably do this a lot, actually. It's not the same approach to data as systematically and inductively collecting and analyzing data to figure out the pattern (I say this as someone who has done that kind of research professionally). It's more like ... metaphorically, it's like something in me knows that this will show itself as useful someday so makes it more vivid to get my attention.

 

[Alea_iacta_est]

You know, I think do some version of the flagging thing. But in my case, it's not really conscious and deliberate like yours, and certainly I don't put a conscious future time stamp on it.

For me, it's more like certain information feels/looks/resonates as more vivid to me than the rest, and I'll register that at some level but not immediately pursue it. Then when the larger scale pattern or meaning gets clearer from more information and time, usually in more obvious ways, the vivid stuff will come back into my line of sight and proves useful. And what I mean by "vivid" is like something that's in color in a black and white context, or three dimensions in a two dimensional field, or it will kind of ring like a bell or otherwise resonate like sound (bass level) in some underneath way, and that vividness will get my attention and I'll mark it. If it doesn't have immediate relevance, I put it aside for later. I think I probably do this a lot, actually. It's not the same approach to data as systematically and inductively collecting and analyzing data to figure out the pattern (I say this as someone who has done that kind of research professionally). It's more like ... metaphorically, it's like something in me knows that this will show itself as useful someday so makes it more vivid to get my attention.

Interesting with the "feels more vivid" than the rest, for I experience a similar phenomenon where I think some information feels like it is heavier than other information, as if there is an added dimension of weight (it sounds strange, but it really isn't).

Also, I've had a bit of an epiphany for the "symbols" said to be characteristic of Ni-types. This always confused me because I thought it was literally seeing a still-image symbol for something, when in fact my symbols are like video bits. I don't always know what they mean, but they feel heavier and more pronounced than other forms of thought when I think about them. I have one prominent one right now where there is a dark figure, who I know is me, facing away from my point of view, as if I'm looking at my own shadowed back, and then about 3 seconds an even darker person comes out of the foreground and puts a hand (the entire arm is colored, but nothing else other than the light-bluish foreground and darker blue background) on the top portion of my back. Since the purpose of this thread is to demystify Ni, I need to explain that I can dissect the "video-bit" (meaning that it isn't some ridiculous vision) which is more like a product of my imagination anyways (everyone can make a simulation in their imagination). I don't know what it symbolizes right now, but I have some ideas.

Interestingly, when I change something with my mind's eye about the simulation/video, it doesn't feel right; for instance, trying to illuminate who the darker figure is by filling in the spaces with random people yields an "uncomfortable" result, and it feels more right if I imagine the figure like it originally was, shrouded.


By the way, any other Ni-doms experience a compulsion to always know what's coming next or what to expect, at least to have a general idea?

 

[yeghor]

I can't think of a direct example. But it seems a lot of Ni-isms are "paradoxes".
Just for contrast, a Ne type can hold several possibilities to be, well, possible, even if they contradict. This is more "shallow" in a sense, so it's not so hard to grasp. But with Ni, and arguably Si, there's an ability to see it not as possibility, but reality. I guess it's just the experience of reality being subjective, a matter of interpretation more than objective fact.

Perhaps N function can be described as fuzzy logic mechanism instead or irrational...

"Fuzzy logic is a form of many-valued logic; it deals with reasoning that is approximate rather than fixed and exact. Compared to traditional binary sets (where variables may take on true or false values) fuzzy logic variables may have a truth value that ranges in degree between 0 and 1. Fuzzy logic has been extended to handle the concept of partial truth, where the truth value may range between completely true and completely false."

I also think that N function is somehow related to imagination...Furthermore, I believe Ne is perceiving what's outside the person and is hitting the external object with scenarios/simulations to gather more data thru the object's reactions to multiple stimuli...Ne gauges the external object to gather data and then uses the internal functions of the Ne-dom to analyze the data gathered so as to come to a singular conclusion about the object (identification/recognition)...

Ni OTOH gazes at what's inside the person...The external functions of the Ni-dom serve as inlets for external information, which are analyzed by Ni-dom and the tertiary function once inside...Therefore both Ni and Ne are actually trying to reach to a singular conclusion about the object using the data gathered thru their respective external functions...Ni starts from 0 and goes to 1 whereas Ne starts from 10 (or 100) and goes down to 1 possible option...At the beginning Ni doesn't see any possible conclusions and then gradually reaches to a singular conclusions when enough data has accumulated within...whereas Ne starts with multiple possibilities and then gradually discards them one by one as further data is gathered...So perhaps both believe their conclusions are absolute...(until conflicting data arrives)...

Do these sound right???

Eta: Ni starting with "0" may be analogous to what people mentioned here about Ni assessments reminding them of a blank slate...

IMO, this makes the Ni+Te combo more interesting in a person because the functions are almost checking each other. I suppose that's what auxiliary functions do (as a complement & "balance"), but it's very obvious in that particular one. Or perhaps there's an advantage that they prove their "checks" to others with Te. NFs have such a disadvantage there. Even INTPs have more frustration.

Can Fe also be checking Ni deductions against the external world...? Te and Fe are both judging functions...Is Fe irrational too (not a rhetorical question)?

I agree that Te seems to be geared more towards articulations whereas Fe more towards gestures...However, I think coupled with Ni and Ti, Fe gives me some a tool in articulating my points as well...using analogies that are specifically geared towards the present audience...so that they can be conveyed to the audience...they are not as elaborate as Te presentations though...

 

[yeghor]

How would you distinguish this from introverted sensing?
They do a storing up of info also.
Kind of how Ti & Fi both create conceptual categories of sorts but in different ways & used to gauge very different things.

I think Si stores detailed data whereas Ni stores the pattern/essence of the data...

For lack of better analogy, Si stores the entire word document whereas Ni replaces the frequently repeating word chains inside the document with symbols and stores the crunched/modified document as well as the deciphering/recalling/decompressing code for the symbols...

It's like using winrar or winzip on a document to compress it to take less storage space...it feels like a storage trick to save storage space and ability to classify and quickly recall data...as well recognize recurring patterns using the decompression code...

 

[Z Buck McFate]

So ... On one layer, I've been wondering why I can't stand having my words and articulated experiences translated back to me or others after being run through a framework that's alien to me (and thus distorted). I mean, it gets to me more than most things can. On another layer, I've been struggling with trying to lift some pretty important stuff into consciousness to see if I should try to articulate it to someone I love, but feel like it's taking me so long just to pinpoint what it is in a way I could try to speak. I actually was thinking about that piece in terms of speed, like I can feel so clearly what's going on but I cannot for the life of me figure out if or how to actually articulate it in a way that has any chance of being understood for what it is - and this is taking so long. And on a third layer, the actual specific issue that I'm struggling with actually comes from a conflict based on this very pattern to begin with, me saying things that the other person really didn't get, things that were fed back to me in twisted form and this was weeks ago and I still haven't been able to pin down what I would say about it if I would say anything.

I do think speed may be one of the conceptual keys here. I'm thinking of the discussion in this thread - I'm paraphrasing here - of the Ni-dom self as "blank" and receiving constant dabs of ink (information) that can cohere into meaningful patterns in our perception based on our specific location (specific location is a big part of how I think about subjectivity for Ni). I compare the speed at which I process information to, say, my INFP partner. Compared to me, she is very quick to conclude that she knows what's happening. She has said she "fills in the blanks" using various tools (Si database with patterned data from her past experiences, for example) to come to conclusions. I go so much slower. I can't force/create patterns I can only let them emerge, and they do so at their own speed regardless of what I want. And then trying to get that perception into a form where I can actually articulate it, and then having that communication actually understood for what it is ... yeah.

It certainly sounds like we’re on a similar tangent.

The term ‘blank’ doesn’t quite sit right with me because (if only for me) the association that brings up is of a blank canvas or something- and blank canvases are easier to work with, they can be consciously and willingly filled in. My 'canvas' will reject any paint (or pastel, pencil, etc) I try to force onto it and it'll poke me in the eye for even trying. I feel it’s more like looking at one of those Magic Eye 3D images and a sort of ‘waiting’ (without much idea of what will surface, but the distinct feeling that the image is already there and I can't see it yet- I’m not choosing it, it’s just there) than it is ‘blankness’ per se.

And yeah, Pe (even Pe aux) to me seems to not understand that limbo in between ‘knowing something is there’ and actually being able to guess what it is. It’s almost like- as soon as they suspect ‘something is there’ (and I realize ‘something’ is incredibly vague, but I can’t think of any other way to say it), they’re flooded with ideas about what it might be- especially Pe doms (obviously).

I think this description I have stolen from PerC might be of interest in this thread.

Ni
Ni is a sub-conscious filtering and collecting of correlations; it filters incidences to detect underlying principals, laws of nature, or reoccurring themes. It can be experienced as a sense of something that causes one to act on a hunch. Sometimes these correlations coalesce into symbols ahead of the Ni user having any explanation for why. Ni users often express a sense of storing up or mentally flagging data and experiences that can be fully digested later, or that they trust will be available for useful recall at an appropriate time.

Ni dominant personalities often seek time to bring sub-conscious correlations out in the open, handing these hunches or symbols off to what Jung labels judging functions; this can be done internally or outside themselves for conscious interpretation, to be verified as causative, relevant or true. Conversely, this “sense of how things work” can make them quick to intuitively grasp a process without the time it takes for a full walk through or a detailed explanation.

I think this description is a fair assessment, but what I find incredibly intriguing is the portion I have underlined. I never thought this would be a connection to a Cognitive Function, but I've always done this, and do this frequently. When I see new information or hear something important, I can actually "flag" that information and tell myself to recall it at a certain date, and it would indeed pop into my mind at the exact time I needed it (once I realized I could do this, I began thinking of things to remember when I lay on my deathbed, and now I'm worried what might surface there). I can tell myself in the morning that I need to get something done tomorrow morning, and I can and probably would forget about it for the rest of the day, but then come morning I would instantly recall it. To add to this, I had an interesting morning when I was running late for something and I was trying to remember what all I needed, and then everything I realized I needed popped into my head like a bombardment of information, and I knew exactly what needed to be done in what order to ensure that I reach the place on time. Anyone else resonate with this at all?

Many of the INFJs here are forever bringing up the mental post-it notes that get made- that much definitely happens. And while they do pop up when relevant- something rather aggravating about it is that I won’t even remember exactly what that sticky note is, instead I simply remember “your unconscious has tagged this information before.”

So roger that on ‘flagging’, but not so much on the clarity of always knowing exactly what those flags mean.

 

[the state i am in]

The term ‘blank’ doesn’t quite sit right with me because (if only for me) the association that brings up is of a blank canvas or something- and blank canvases are easier to work with, they can be consciously and willingly filled in. My 'canvas' will reject any paint (or pastel, pencil, etc) I try to force onto it and it'll poke me in the eye for even trying. I feel it’s more like looking at one of those Magic Eye 3D images and a sort of ‘waiting’ (without much idea of what will surface, but the distinct feeling that the image is already there and I can't see it yet- I’m not choosing it, it’s just there) than it is ‘blankness’ per se.

yeah, people jump in how it's all a bunch of hunches, but it's the slow version of the fast system. it's not just immediate representational consciousness skipping out on fully experiencing anything. while this is true of Pi in some sense, being a top-down, efficiency perception process as it is, we add another layer to the process. it's not just a physical correlate, it's a metaphysical correlate, which only exists cross-contextually. like without the categories of the categories, the conditions of the conditions, it's not Ni. that's why it's kind of the stacks, or the octaves, or the levels, or the alchemical structures, or the architectures, or the algorithms. it's an inherent intentional building technology, like all J, but made of the essence of things rather than the substance of them, the context of them rather than the sensuality of them.

so to utilize Ni, for me, is much like you say. it is to soften your focus until you just see an imaginary kind of hyperspace. and then you just wait. offering a command, "self-organize," until, presto, the center of it finally arrives. you can't really explain how you got there (or how it got to you), because it's a bunch of wormholes that can't be observed. a kind of non-linear time travel. the wormholes were within the conditions of your perception, rather than in your ability to perceive through yourself what it's like to experience the movement through them.

i get impressionistic snapshots, sometimes, on the way, and can word some of the abstract shapes and aspects of the analogies, but the process itself, in its most whole, which requires a kind of visualization of imaginary meanings and shapes that don't exist in and aren't bound by the rules of real space, is long and tedious. i just keep circulating through myself, kind of transfixed on a few things, until the self-organization happens. until i realize, "oh, it is already done."

that's why, after houdini'ing my way out of the mental chains we collectively share, when busting my way out of a broken metaphysic, when communicating, sometimes i'm just like, let them eat cake. let them untangle themselves. it's just a disconnect, experientially, because i just have no idea what happened. and i'm tired. at least nowadays when i sit down to do work, i commit to a recap period at the end of each session, so i have some story sense to go on, rather than just being tilt-a-whirled to the point of physical exhaustion. deep Ni work is fucking exhausting. it's not something that connects me to my sense of myself as a person, but it is tremendously powerful when i utilize it in a way that does. it needs to be done strategically. otherwise, it's like getting lost in the endless incantations of the butterfly effect, trying to reverse engineer search teams to locate each seed that has contributed to the growing up of this moment, without even being aware of how you yourself arrived there, let alone being able to use that self-awareness in a way that enables you to relate to how others are arriving there as well.

part of why Ne is so liberating is to feel what it's like to experience this movement while also experiencing the world itself as it is equally changing. it's kind of insane. like Ne is kind of like disembodied and flowing through stories abstracted beyond what can be embodied, guided by a kind of imaginariness holding it all together internally, a kind of essentialized experience of interactiveness in ebbing and flowing motion. so is Ni in its experience of the conditionedness of the world, the underlying organization that allows what we perceive to exist as a possibility, a kind of virtual ground for the movement. it is tautological in this sense, to set forth to imagine the structure of the structures, waiting patiently until you simply complete the circle in enough ways that you just understand in whole, centered context, and you're jumped above it, abstracted and perhaps bracketed from time even as it and you yourself are driven by it.

 

[Werebudgie]

The term ‘blank’ doesn’t quite sit right with me ... I feel it’s more like looking at one of those Magic Eye 3D images and a sort of ‘waiting’ (without much idea of what will surface, but the distinct feeling that the image is already there and I can't see it yet- I’m not choosing it, it’s just there) than it is ‘blankness’ per se.

Actually, that does resonate more with how I experience it. I think the initial "blank" description in this thread came from a non-Ni-dom, then the ink dabs part was added by a Ni-dom. But I think your description is even more resonant with what's really "there" for me. It's a landscape of information that's non-differentiated to my conscious mind. And for me, organically, that's really okay.

eta: So, at dinner, I mentioned the "blank" concept to my partner and she said it doesn't match with her experience of me at all. I then mentioned your Magic 3D Eye metaphor to her and she said that actually does mesh strongly with her experience of me. This underscores my sense that your metaphor refines whatever we're trying to get at in favor of greater accuracy.

I think I've written this somewhere before but - organically, in contrast to my Fi-dom partner, I seem to have a very high tolerance for ambiguity (ambiguity meaning a lack of consciousness and judging) of information. Like, I'm okay with looking at that undifferentiated field (the metaphorical Magic Eye 3D image) without seeing "it" at first. Unless I accept external standards that aren't in synch with Ni perception, I'm really fine with that situation, the looking and waiting. In contrast, if I try to describe anything of that field to my INFP partner, she wants to know what it means in a very sharply defined conscious way. And if it isn't defined and conscious like that, she'll start filling in the blanks and generating possible meanings ... like "Maybe it's this over there, that could look like a bear" *point point* ... which then disrupts the waiting, the stillness, that I need to allow the image to show itself.

And interestingly enough, I wrote the above before really reading this next part, but it seems to fit perfectly with my experience and observations:

And yeah, Pe (even Pe aux) to me seems to not understand that limbo in between ‘knowing something is there’ and actually being able to guess what it is. It’s almost like- as soon as they suspect ‘something is there’ (and I realize ‘something’ is incredibly vague, but I can’t think of any other way to say it), they’re flooded with ideas about what it might be- especially Pe doms (obviously).

This resonates very strongly with what my INFP/Ne-aux has described to me when we've discussed why things so often go wrong when I try to share Ni information before I clearly know what it means. It's like, without something to anchor the information, she's almost compelled to start generating possible meanings. And again, in interaction, this can really create difficulty for me because I need the stillness of waiting in what you call limbo and what I called ambiguity. Mine is a much slower, quieter space - it's like I have a need for a certain kind of silence and stillness to allow what's there to emerge, and my INFP is inexorably drawn to fill up that silence with possible meanings as a way to get at what "it" is.

eta: After discussing this a bit with my INFP, my sense is that in her case at least, the requirement for focus over ambiguity is more of a Fi thing (or at least a Ji thing) than a Ne thing - Ne-aux is serving Fi-dom's requirement of more focus. But the discussion itself was sort of unclear, so not completely sure that's the case.

Interesting with the "feels more vivid" than the rest, for I experience a similar phenomenon where I think some information feels like it is heavier than other information, as if there is an added dimension of weight (it sounds strange, but it really isn't).

I didn't expect you to have a metaphorical "feel" for the information because I've seldom seen INTJs talk in terms of that kind of thing, so this is an interesting surprise! Seems like in both our cases, there is a sense of an added dimension (weight in your case; color, layer of sound underneath, actual additional dimension in mine).

Also, I've had a bit of an epiphany for the "symbols" said to be characteristic of Ni-types. This always confused me because I thought it was literally seeing a still-image symbol for something, when in fact my symbols are like video bits. I don't always know what they mean, but they feel heavier and more pronounced than other forms of thought when I think about them. I have one prominent one right now where there is a dark figure, who I know is me, facing away from my point of view, as if I'm looking at my own shadowed back, and then about 3 seconds an even darker person comes out of the foreground and puts a hand (the entire arm is colored, but nothing else other than the light-bluish foreground and darker blue background) on the top portion of my back.

FWIW, I can actually feel some sort of additional gravity to the words when I read your description. Something in my stomach and the hairs on my legs stood up in response. Not a bad response at all, just a visceral one and some sort of humming recognition. I have no idea what it means (which IMO makes sense given the subjectivity of Ni) but the feel of whatever this is seems to translate across a computer screen.

(this makes me wonder, if a group of Ni-doms got together and described this kind of information to each other, would we consistently feel the extra dimensions from each others' direct descriptions of Ni information? I feel like I've had experiences like this before when other Ni-doms have described images from Ni perception ... like I can tell it's not my area of the landscape but I can still feel the additional dimension of the information).

Since the purpose of this thread is to demystify Ni, I need to explain that I can dissect the "video-bit" (meaning that it isn't some ridiculous vision) which is more like a product of my imagination anyways (everyone can make a simulation in their imagination). I don't know what it symbolizes right now, but I have some ideas.

And I know I'm kind of repeating myself here, but I'm a different kind of Ni-dom from you and I have no idea what this means specifically, but I can feel the additional layer in your description across a computer connection and from a screen. I repeat this to underscore something: apparently give our shared dominant function, I already know - viscerally, in feel - that it's not a ridiculous vision. I'm just really glad you decided to go ahead and describe it directly before you added the demystifying part.

Interestingly, when I change something with my mind's eye about the simulation/video, it doesn't feel right; for instance, trying to illuminate who the darker figure is by filling in the spaces with random people yields an "uncomfortable" result, and it feels more right if I imagine the figure like it originally was, shrouded.

I have absolutely had this kind of experience! I actually didn't expect anyone else to describe it. On reflection, I think it's a core attribute of Ni information for me. Whether the information is visual or something else if I try to change it, it feels wrong ... and when I return to what it is, it feels right. And sometimes my conscious mind would prefer that it is some other way, but again, it doesn't feel right, it's uncomfortable, if I try to change it. I hadn't actually associated this with Ni before but it fits the overall discussion pretty well IMO.

By the way, any other Ni-doms experience a compulsion to always know what's coming next or what to expect, at least to have a general idea?

Yes, I feel that way in relation to the external world. I've associated this with Ni-dom + Je-aux. My inner world is extremely undifferentiated and ambiguous and open (as described in the comment to Z Buck), and I seem to need some sort of balance of structure when it comes to my outer world. My INFP partner has it in reverse: her inner world is quite structured by her Fi value matrix, so her outer world orientation needs an open flow for balance.

 

[Werebudgie]

Is Fe irrational too (not a rhetorical question)?

My understanding is that in Jungian cognitive function terms, N and S are considered "irrational" functions and and T and F are considered "rational" functions. (basically, perceiving is categorized as irrational and judging as rational in that system.) So if my understanding is correct, Fe is a rational function in this model.

 

[Alea_iacta_est]

I didn't expect you to have a metaphorical "feel" for the information because I've seldom seen INTJs talk in terms of that kind of thing, so this is an interesting surprise! Seems like in both our cases, there is a sense of an added dimension (weight in your case; color, layer of sound underneath, actual additional dimension in mine).



FWIW, I can actually feel some sort of additional gravity to the words when I read your description. Something in my stomach and the hairs on my legs stood up in response. Not a bad response at all, just a visceral one and some sort of humming recognition. I have no idea what it means (which IMO makes sense given the subjectivity of Ni) but the feel of whatever this is seems to translate across a computer screen.

(this makes me wonder, if a group of Ni-doms got together and described this kind of information to each other, would we consistently feel the extra dimensions from each others' direct descriptions of Ni information? I feel like I've had experiences like this before when other Ni-doms have described images from Ni perception ... like I can tell it's not my area of the landscape but I can still feel the additional dimension of the information).



And I know I'm kind of repeating myself here, but I'm a different kind of Ni-dom from you and I have no idea what this means specifically, but I can feel the additional layer in your description across a computer connection and from a screen. I repeat this to underscore something: apparently give our shared dominant function, I already know - viscerally, in feel - that it's not a ridiculous vision. I'm just really glad you decided to go ahead and describe it directly before you added the demystifying part.



I have absolutely had this kind of experience! I actually didn't expect anyone else to describe it. On reflection, I think it's a core attribute of Ni information for me. Whether the information is visual or something else if I try to change it, it feels wrong ... and when I return to what it is, it feels right. And sometimes my conscious mind would prefer that it is some other way, but again, it doesn't feel right, it's uncomfortable, if I try to change it. I hadn't actually associated this with Ni before but it fits the overall discussion pretty well IMO.



Yes, I feel that way in relation to the external world. I've associated this with Ni-dom + Je-aux. My inner world is extremely undifferentiated and ambiguous and open (as described in the comment to Z Buck), and I seem to need some sort of balance of structure when it comes to my outer world. My INFP partner has it in reverse: her inner world is quite structured by her Fi value matrix, so her outer world orientation needs an open flow for balance.

I think the difference between Ni-Te and Ni-Fe is one of empathizing vs systematizing. Your visceral feelings from reading my latest symbol might arise out of the empathy/emotion-seeking aspect of Fe, whereas I don't really feel it on a visceral level. I do find it highly interesting that you were able to experience the vision in that visceral way considering the lack of contextual and concrete information, it goes to show that our interpretations are seemingly idiosyncratic and unfettered from lack of detail.

I can completely agree with the need to predict the external environment, as I feel that I am completely crippled if I don't know what I am doing or if I don't know what's about to come next, in which case I scramble for any information to aid me.

 

[Werebudgie]

I think the difference between Ni-Te and Ni-Fe is one of empathizing vs systematizing. Your visceral feelings from reading my latest symbol might arise out of the empathy/emotion-seeking aspect of Fe, whereas I don't really feel it on a visceral level.

Fe is about human values, not necessarily emotion, at least for me. The use of the word "feeling" for this function can be confusing because it can be used as a direct synonym for emotion outside of Jungian contexts. I really don't want to go off on a aux-related tangent, but do want to say this: When it comes to my own description of my experience, I'd prefer others don't assign emotion to my Fe-aux. Emotion/emotion-seeking is really not part of it for me and I think empathy is something else entirely for me as well. I speak only for myself on this - other INFJs experiences and preferences may be different.

/tangent

I want to come back to the other parts of what you wrote when I have more time... I think I may have some clarification questions about what you mean in your second sentence especially.

 

[valaki]

Yea, sorry I didn't have time before to explain much.

It's not a completely conscious process after they have a lot of practice cause it doesn't need to be.

Anyways this is an example of exactly how my mind works when playing video games, I couldn't find anything better to demonstrate what I'm talking about.

But if you skip to 56:50 minutes into it, you will see what I mean : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MGfhQTbcqmA

That flow of a pattern is what I'm talking about. The "circuit" that he's talking about. That is how I play.

The Ni dom seemed to do that kind of circuit a little...but was way more flexible than me.

And Se doms just don't do that.

Does that clear it up better?

Sorry the link doesn't work You got a working one?

As for Se decisions being a conscious process or not, I experience mine as not being conscious. What is conscious is the sense data, the decision I make based on that isn't consciously done. It's a fast automatic reaction/response. Trust me it would take too long to try and consider these things consciously. How would a fast Se process exist then? Rhetorical question

I have no idea if this is a common problem for Ni doms growing up though. I have always felt like most people seem to be able to take easily communicating for granted- and as such, they expect a certain kind of efficiency (?) that I can’t really keep up with? I’m not sure that makes sense, and it’s not even entirely about communication so much as overall interaction and the ability to make sense of other people’s words and behavior.

Eh I can have trouble with that too. Doubt this is Ni much in this generalised fashion anyway, this almost sounds like an autism spectrum thingie . Or just some kind of introversion

It’s like there’s this big invisible metronome somewhere and other people don’t have nearly as much trouble keeping up with it as I do (i.e. being told when and how long to focus on something, and being told specifically what to focus on, etc). It’s not that I expect the world to revolve around me, but I’d like to as least make a pocket around myself where I can do things at my own speed- and even that seems difficult sometimes.

Sounds like introversion...?

I’m not entirely sure what you’re asking here. It sounds to me like you’re asking how this could describe Ni when it sounds like a judging process? (If not, disregard the following explanation.) I don’t think Ni is the aspect that scrambles to come up with an explanation- I think Ni is the thing that drops “If A, then Q” on the table and the judging functions then must scramble around to find the linear progression which led from A to Q.

Um... I do that a lot. See X and then Y and then "scramble around" to find the steps. I do have this need to find the steps though and I will usually succeed and I even kind of enjoy doing it, for the challenge and for the sake of the result at least. But I usually have this quick process (that you called Ni) work in tandem with logic. (In a few cases, without logic in the traditional sense.. but that's the exception from the rule)
So I kind of assumed it was just this well automatically managed Ti. I kind of see it as Judging anyway, "if A, then Q".

Do you think it's more complicated than that, then? You don't see that as Judging?

Maybe a better way of saying it is that I think it’s important to take responsibility for the assumptions we make. Jumping to quick conclusions- and throwing a lot of negative emotional charge at someone because of that hasty conclusion- is (imo) just a shitty way to treat people.

As an oversimplified example: say someone steps on my foot. I could either instantly react and explain to that person how careless I think it was for them to step on my foot….or I could stop and look for the reasons why it might have happened. If something stands out (like, say- someone on the other side of the person, physically pushing them in my direction) as a cause existing beyond that person, then I can save us both the trouble of that conversation (e.g. “Goddamnit, why are you so careless?!” / “It wasn’t my fault! That person pushed me!!”). Those conversations are so exhausting- I really can’t handle too much interaction with the kinds of people who can’t put that stuff together on their own before saying something.

I think it’s a bad idea to ‘figure out someone else’s position’ in a non-dialogical sort of way, to make assumptions about someone else’s position and neither talk about it nor listen to any disagreement they have about it, for probably obvious reasons- but specifically what I was talking about was stopping to consider the larger ‘cause and effect’ picture before throwing a bunch of negative emotional charge at someone. It’s important to make sure what we’ve “figured out” actually does match what goes on inside the other person- but I was specifically referring to figuring out how to avoid senselessly throwing negative emotional charge around.

That's a mature way of handling stuff yeah... I so totally agree with you on some points here. Like the bolded one.

Not sure what you meant by the underlined though. What kind of obvious reasons did you refer to? I have no idea.

I can't think of a direct example. But it seems a lot of Ni-isms are "paradoxes".
Just for contrast, a Ne type can hold several possibilities to be, well, possible, even if they contradict. This is more "shallow" in a sense, so it's not so hard to grasp. But with Ni, and arguably Si, there's an ability to see it not as possibility, but reality. I guess it's just the experience of reality being subjective, a matter of interpretation more than objective fact.

Mhmm okay, that makes sense. I don't relate to that as much as to the "A -> Q" example as explained by someone else above. And it doesn't seem Judging at all, right.

I find each limited, but insightful, and when combined, do a pretty good job of explaining the connection between mindset & visible personality. Not complete or without flaw by any means.

I find MBTI + enneagram kind of leaves nothing for Socionics. Though Socionics still seems interesting to some extent, some of the intertype rels stuff is interesting maybe, it's just so many flaws in that theory... at least how it's presented on English sites.

The point I was making is that MBTI J is NOT just a result of Te/Fe, but a result of a whole mindset which includes Pi. The J outer personality comes from Je + Pi, not just Pi. This is probably why you see & agree with the below. There are characteristics of MBTI "J" in Pi thinking. It's not just a result of Je.

Which characteristics of MBTI J would be in Pi? All of them? Surely not?

It doesn't feel "empty", just formless. Perhaps we are not speaking of the same thing & I don't really experience what you do.

The abstract partially unconscious thingie I was talking about, that's exactly this formless thing it seems. So I'm not sure why we aren't on the same page about this. Do let me know where you see that different from your "blank formless" thingie.

 

[yeghor]

yeah, people jump in how it's all a bunch of hunches, but it's the slow version of the fast system. it's not just immediate representational consciousness skipping out on fully experiencing anything. while this is true of Pi in some sense, being a top-down, efficiency perception process as it is, we add another layer to the process. it's not just a physical correlate, it's a metaphysical correlate, which only exists cross-contextually. like without the categories of the categories, the conditions of the conditions, it's not Ni. that's why it's kind of the stacks, or the octaves, or the levels, or the alchemical structures, or the architectures, or the algorithms. it's an inherent intentional building technology, like all J, but made of the essence of things rather than the substance of them, the context of them rather than the sensuality of them.

so to utilize Ni, for me, is much like you say. it is to soften your focus until you just see an imaginary kind of hyperspace. and then you just wait. offering a command, "self-organize," until, presto, the center of it finally arrives. you can't really explain how you got there (or how it got to you), because it's a bunch of wormholes that can't be observed. a kind of non-linear time travel. the wormholes were within the conditions of your perception, rather than in your ability to perceive through yourself what it's like to experience the movement through them.

i get impressionistic snapshots, sometimes, on the way, and can word some of the abstract shapes and aspects of the analogies, but the process itself, in its most whole, which requires a kind of visualization of imaginary meanings and shapes that don't exist in and aren't bound by the rules of real space, is long and tedious. i just keep circulating through myself, kind of transfixed on a few things, until the self-organization happens. until i realize, "oh, it is already done."

that's why, after houdini'ing my way out of the mental chains we collectively share, when busting my way out of a broken metaphysic, when communicating, sometimes i'm just like, let them eat cake. let them untangle themselves. it's just a disconnect, experientially, because i just have no idea what happened. and i'm tired. at least nowadays when i sit down to do work, i commit to a recap period at the end of each session, so i have some story sense to go on, rather than just being tilt-a-whirled to the point of physical exhaustion. deep Ni work is fucking exhausting. it's not something that connects me to my sense of myself as a person, but it is tremendously powerful when i utilize it in a way that does. it needs to be done strategically. otherwise, it's like getting lost in the endless incantations of the butterfly effect, trying to reverse engineer search teams to locate each seed that has contributed to the growing up of this moment, without even being aware of how you yourself arrived there, let alone being able to use that self-awareness in a way that enables you to relate to how others are arriving there as well.

part of why Ne is so liberating is to feel what it's like to experience this movement while also experiencing the world itself as it is equally changing. it's kind of insane. like Ne is kind of like disembodied and flowing through stories abstracted beyond what can be embodied, guided by a kind of imaginariness holding it all together internally, a kind of essentialized experience of interactiveness in ebbing and flowing motion. so is Ni in its experience of the conditionedness of the world, the underlying organization that allows what we perceive to exist as a possibility, a kind of virtual ground for the movement. it is tautological in this sense, to set forth to imagine the structure of the structures, waiting patiently until you simply complete the circle in enough ways that you just understand in whole, centered context, and you're jumped above it, abstracted and perhaps bracketed from time even as it and you yourself are driven by it.

Whenever I read your posts, it feels like I am reading a Virginia Woolf novel...

 

[valaki]

"Ni is a sub-conscious filtering and collecting of correlations; it filters incidences to detect underlying principals, laws of nature, or reoccurring themes. It can be experienced as a sense of something that causes one to act on a hunch. Sometimes these correlations coalesce into symbols ahead of the Ni user having any explanation for why. Ni users often express a sense of storing up or mentally flagging data and experiences that can be fully digested later, or that they trust will be available for useful recall at an appropriate time.

Ni dominant personalities often seek time to bring sub-conscious correlations out in the open, handing these hunches or symbols off to what Jung labels judging functions; this can be done internally or outside themselves for conscious interpretation, to be verified as causative, relevant or true. Conversely, this “sense of how things work” can make them quick to intuitively grasp a process without the time it takes for a full walk through or a detailed explanation."

I think this description is a fair assessment, but what I find incredibly intriguing is the portion I have underlined. I never thought this would be a connection to a Cognitive Function, but I've always done this, and do this frequently. When I see new information or hear something important, I can actually "flag" that information and tell myself to recall it at a certain date, and it would indeed pop into my mind at the exact time I needed it (once I realized I could do this, I began thinking of things to remember when I lay on my deathbed, and now I'm worried what might surface there). I can tell myself in the morning that I need to get something done tomorrow morning, and I can and probably would forget about it for the rest of the day, but then come morning I would instantly recall it. To add to this, I had an interesting morning when I was running late for something and I was trying to remember what all I needed, and then everything I realized I needed popped into my head like a bombardment of information, and I knew exactly what needed to be done in what order to ensure that I reach the place on time. Anyone else resonate with this at all?

Uhm, you know what, I have exactly that too, I just attributed it to a well working S. Because it's to do with practical things like what to do next morning blabblablah. I don't see it as a real future oriented thingie in such practical examples. If that was just a limited example then do let me know about other less limited examples.

And the underlined IMO is about something completely different. I think it's more like this, get information from wherever and patiently expect it all add up later. I do that only in certain areas in my life. I would imagine a Ni-dom is doing it all the time.

I think Si stores detailed data whereas Ni stores the pattern/essence of the data...

For lack of better analogy, Si stores the entire word document whereas Ni replaces the frequently repeating word chains inside the document with symbols and stores the crunched/modified document as well as the deciphering/recalling/decompressing code for the symbols...

It's like using winrar or winzip on a document to compress it to take less storage space...it feels like a storage trick to save storage space and ability to classify and quickly recall data...as well recognize recurring patterns using the decompression code...

Lol and mine is like this, if I'm to remember a text, I cannot recall any of the original words, I only have the meaning and I have to tell the "story" again using my own words. The meaning is stored in a very small place cognitively of course. See this is even more efficient than winrar

And yeah, Pe (even Pe aux) to me seems to not understand that limbo in between ‘knowing something is there’ and actually being able to guess what it is. It’s almost like- as soon as they suspect ‘something is there’ (and I realize ‘something’ is incredibly vague, but I can’t think of any other way to say it), they’re flooded with ideas about what it might be- especially Pe doms (obviously).

Se types too? Because I definitely don't do this with Se. I thought that was more Ne-ish, being *flooded with* ideas about what it MIGHT be. No that's not how I work. I will look and I either have the answer pop into my head pretty quickly or I don't have anything at all. It's like an unconscious process tries to sort the answer asap and if it runs into a mental "wall", it knows not to go on. Simply not enough information available. That's the assumption anyway. I do think this is the Ni part of the Se/Ni equation but it's prob Se > Ni in this specific case as far as my understanding goes. That would be not only because Ni I assume is not going to "give up" so fast but mainly because I just want to find the answer concretely and want to bring it into the conscious asap.

Many of the INFJs here are forever bringing up the mental post-it notes that get made- that much definitely happens. And while they do pop up when relevant- something rather aggravating about it is that I won’t even remember exactly what that sticky note is, instead I simply remember “your unconscious has tagged this information before.”

A trick I use: if I know that physically I'm going to be in one specific area when I need to remember the thing, I will change the position of an object there. I will instantly notice that when I need to remember the stuff and this will trigger the remembering process and it works That's because I suppose I get to recall the moment I had messed with the object or moved it. I don't concretely recall that past moment though, it's more an unconscious gut sense thingie. Oh and if I can, I pick an object that can be associated with the to-be-remembered information in a way, that improves the method even more.

Interesting with the "feels more vivid" than the rest, for I experience a similar phenomenon where I think some information feels like it is heavier than other information, as if there is an added dimension of weight (it sounds strange, but it really isn't).

Almost sounds like your synesthesia

I guess I don't have this so concretely if I feel some information is more important than other ones. I just kind of feel it without any added synesthesia-like qualities. Tbh all that happens in limited areas in my life. But I guess it's Ni, just not "on" all the time.

Also, I've had a bit of an epiphany for the "symbols" said to be characteristic of Ni-types. This always confused me because I thought it was literally seeing a still-image symbol for something, when in fact my symbols are like video bits. I don't always know what they mean, but they feel heavier and more pronounced than other forms of thought when I think about them. I have one prominent one right now where there is a dark figure, who I know is me, facing away from my point of view, as if I'm looking at my own shadowed back, and then about 3 seconds an even darker person comes out of the foreground and puts a hand (the entire arm is colored, but nothing else other than the light-bluish foreground and darker blue background) on the top portion of my back. Since the purpose of this thread is to demystify Ni, I need to explain that I can dissect the "video-bit" (meaning that it isn't some ridiculous vision) which is more like a product of my imagination anyways (everyone can make a simulation in their imagination). I don't know what it symbolizes right now, but I have some ideas.

Interestingly, when I change something with my mind's eye about the simulation/video, it doesn't feel right; for instance, trying to illuminate who the darker figure is by filling in the spaces with random people yields an "uncomfortable" result, and it feels more right if I imagine the figure like it originally was, shrouded.

How often do you have these video like symbols? Your symbol is interesting btw I got loads of them in a specific period of my life (yap that stressful one). Some of them I liked and tried to keep and I still remember them. The meanings were all obvious to me btw. All my unconscious stuff got closer to the conscious in that period of my life so I guess that's why. Their meanings wouldn't always have been clear to an outsider if I somehow managed to show them. After I got out of that life period, I also had another symbol pop up and that one was most puzzling. It took me a while to figure out a few bits about it. Btw not just symbols.. In the same period, I had other shit to figure out too though those were chains of events, reactions in behaviours, etc, not symbols.

(oh and yeah this is the kind of Ni use that doesn't connect with logic, exception from the rule, as mentioned above)

By the way, any other Ni-doms experience a compulsion to always know what's coming next or what to expect, at least to have a general idea?

Hey just wanna add that I'm the exact opposite way by default. Helpful data point for you? Sometimes I do like to have a general idea though but it's either so vague it's not practically usable or it's concrete enough but doesn't extend far into the future.

I think I've written this somewhere before but - organically, in contrast to my Fi-dom partner, I seem to have a very high tolerance for ambiguity (ambiguity meaning a lack of consciousness and judging) of information. Like, I'm okay with looking at that undifferentiated field (the metaphorical Magic Eye 3D image) without seeing "it" at first. Unless I accept external standards that aren't in synch with Ni perception, I'm really fine with that situation, the looking and waiting. In contrast, if I try to describe anything of that field to my INFP partner, she wants to know what it means in a very sharply defined conscious way. And if it isn't defined and conscious like that, she'll start filling in the blanks and generating possible meanings ... like "Maybe it's this over there, that could look like a bear" *point point* ... which then disrupts the waiting, the stillness, that I need to allow the image to show itself.

That part about accepting ambiguity I think is also a difference between N and S too

...I repeat this to underscore something: apparently give our shared dominant function, I already know - viscerally, in feel - that it's not a ridiculous vision. I'm just really glad you decided to go ahead and describe it directly before you added the demystifying part.

Possibly you're not the only one who feels it.

 

[Alea_iacta_est]

[MENTION=20622]valaki[/MENTION]

Apparently flagging information is the utilization of Ni, but I think it's abstract flagging (as in experiencing some information differently from other information through some sort of added idiosyncratic dimension).

As for symbols, I can't remember a period of my life where I didn't have a "symbol", but I also don't remember each of them specifically either. Sometimes I get smaller "symbols" (these usually aren't videos, more like plain insights) just from small things that foreshadow a possible future that I must mentally prepare for (Ni alerting Te?). I've even experienced "symbolic" future insights from several TypC posts, including some of yours (this sort of illustrates the utter paranoia of Ni, that everything has an underlying meaning and that there is always a bigger picture). I've had some recently with some of [MENTION=20944]Nihilogen[/MENTION]'s posts, as if I need to prepare for some conversation in the future due to something I find lacking at the present time. I often end up experiencing these "symbols" and then build complex contingency plans, but due to the fact that there is sometimes no concrete evidence to support these idiosyncratic "symbols" I often find that I was either A. wrong about the insight, or B. the insight didn't matter (Te justification of idiosyncratic Ni, juxtaposition of most irrational irrational function and most rational rational function?). In fact, all of the parenthetical phrases I have used in this paragraph and usually most of my paragraphs are me expressing my thought-process with what I presume to be Ni (making idiosyncratic assumptions that aren't objectively grounded in reality and cannot always be objectively realized in the environment?).

It is sort of useful to know that you are sort of the opposite when it comes to knowing what's coming. Something about my psyche dictates that I must always be in complete control over my body, my environment, and my mind, and always know what's coming next, for if I don't, I tend to stress out and become rather flighty and anxious.

 

[valaki]

As for symbols, I can't remember a period of my life where I didn't have a "symbol", but I also don't remember each of them specifically either. Sometimes I get smaller "symbols" (these usually aren't videos, more like plain insights) just from small things that foreshadow a possible future that I must mentally prepare for (Ni alerting Te?). I've even experienced "symbolic" future insights from several TypC posts, including some of yours (this sort of illustrates the utter paranoia of Ni, that everything has an underlying meaning and that there is always a bigger picture). I've had some recently with some of [MENTION=20944]Nihilogen[/MENTION]'s posts, as if I need to prepare for some conversation in the future due to something I find lacking at the present time. I often end up experiencing these "symbols" and then build complex contingency plans, but due to the fact that there is sometimes no concrete evidence to support these idiosyncratic "symbols" I often find that I was either A. wrong about the insight, or B. the insight didn't matter (Te justification of idiosyncratic Ni, juxtaposition of most irrational irrational function and most rational rational function?). In fact, all of the parenthetical phrases I have used in this paragraph and usually most of my paragraphs are me expressing my thought-process with what I presume to be Ni (making idiosyncratic assumptions that aren't objectively grounded in reality and cannot always be objectively realized in the environment?).

Hahah well cool if I triggered some of your insights

I like to post on this forum actually for that reason too, I mean, I don't specifically expect anyone to have some insight about my posts but I do try to provide a lot of data points and whatnot, especially if it's in contradiction with whatever was assumed previously; hoping it will be useful somehow.

That Ni-Te combo is indeed weird.

It is sort of useful to know that you are sort of the opposite when it comes to knowing what's coming. Something about my psyche dictates that I must always be in complete control over my body, my environment, and my mind, and always know what's coming next, for if I don't, I tend to stress out and become rather flighty and anxious.

Guess this sounds very Ni-ish! Btw I like to be in control over my body and mind and environment myself but not in this way of knowing what's coming next. Maybe it's Se way instead of Ni. It's very focused in the moment. Also, I'm just proud of having control (and the fight that sometimes is needed), it's got nothing to do with getting stressed.

 

[Evo]

Sorry the link doesn't work You got a working one?

As for Se decisions being a conscious process or not, I experience mine as not being conscious. What is conscious is the sense data, the decision I make based on that isn't consciously done. It's a fast automatic reaction/response. Trust me it would take too long to try and consider these things consciously. How would a fast Se process exist then? Rhetorical question

Just youtube Dario Nardi Neuroscience of Personality and start it at 56:50. I dunno why it's not working. :/

 

[yeghor]

...I think the initial "blank" description in this thread came from a non-Ni-dom, then the ink dabs part was added by a Ni-dom. But I think your description is even more resonant with what's really "there" for me. It's a landscape of information that's non-differentiated to my conscious mind. And for me, organically, that's really okay..."

Hey, [MENTION=20789]Werebudgie[/MENTION], actually it was first mentioned by [MENTION=6561]OrangeAppled[/MENTION]:

...It's interesting how people often apply this "difficult to grasp" aspect of Pi to Ni, and less so to Si. People are very comfortable accepting simplistic explanations of Si (perhaps because Si is more common in people), but seem very disappointed when Ni is explained simply. Yet time & again, I see Ni-doms explain themselves rather simply. And other people (including me) are like, "huh, that's IT?". I suppose it's because the Ni type is often touted as something so mysterious & complex, yet it jives more with my experience of them that there's a kind internal blankness there....

And then [MENTION=19715]Susurrus[/MENTION] likened that blankness to a canvas that gets smudged with ink:

Yes, there's this sort of blankness with Ni doms, I've noticed too. That's a good way of putting it. Kind of like a blank canvas that constantly gets smudges of ink and out of nowhere an image takes shape. The shape may mean nothing but for the subject the shape transforms it into something that has meaning to that individual...

And then you reiterated the blank canvas example once more...:

... I'm thinking of the discussion in this thread - I'm paraphrasing here - of the Ni-dom self as "blank" and receiving constant dabs of ink (information) that can cohere into meaningful patterns in our perception based on our specific location (specific location is a big part of how I think about subjectivity for Ni). I compare the speed at which I process information to, say, my INFP partner...