[NF] introverted intuition is this true?

[chado]

is this true that introverted intuition uses past experiences to from its vision?

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

That sounds more like Si.
Although any function requires some reference to experience, even it that just be the use of language which was learned. Ni will take abstractions it has derived from past experiences as well as from any other source to create its vision. It isn't about the concrete details of life, but what each experience and idea represents. Commonalities between ideas and experiences are noticed, patterns observed, and then core concepts are extracted and reapplied fluidly to evaluate new situations.

For one example, personal experience with people and learned ideas about psychology together can teach Ni that humans are capable of deep dichotomies in thought and behavior. That principle exists in observing behaviors of anyone from a political tyrant to an innocent toddler. Knowing this is an attribute of human nature makes it possible to not assume a new person one meets will always behaves in a consistent manner. By observing the new person, Ni may notice hints of a dichotomy and so have greater ability to predict that the new person may behave in ways others could not predict because they based their expectations only on the specific, concrete interactions they have had with the person without looking for subtleties that could speak to this deeper truth about the complexity of human nature.

 

[Coriolis]

As far as I know, Ni uses EVERYTHING to form its vision. Anything and everything is subject to being caught up in the butterfly net that connects seemingly disparate items and distills from them some pattern, prediction, or method.

 

[Destiny]

is this true that introverted intuition uses past experiences to from its vision?

Ni doesn't really focus much on the past, they mainly look toward the future, they only looked back at the past when they want to observe patterns and predict how the future will unfold.

 

[á´…eparted]

As far as I know, Ni uses EVERYTHING to form its vision. Anything and everything is subject to being caught up in the butterfly net that connects seemingly disparate items and distills from them some pattern, prediction, or method.

This.

One peculiararity that I have noticed with Ni is that the user often isn't fully aware of themselves using it. It kind of is a black box.

The word I use to describe Ni is "convergent".

 

[ZNP-TBA]

is this true that introverted intuition uses past experiences to from its vision?

Yes but it would be more accurate to say it uses past impressions of experiences. This means after someone has gathered an impression of an experience after it has already filtered through their cognitive processes.

That sounds more like Si.
Although any function requires some reference to experience, even it that just be the use of language which was learned. Ni will take abstractions it has derived from past experiences as well as from any other source to create its vision. It isn't about the concrete details of life, but what each experience and idea represents. Commonalities between ideas and experiences are noticed, patterns observed, and then core concepts are extracted and reapplied fluidly to evaluate new situations.

Both Ni and Si use a 'database' of stored impressions. The rest of this I agree with. Ni doesn't really catalogue all the nitpicky details but tries to extract the meaning or 'essence' of that which it is trying to understand. Like both N functions it asks " where does this fit in the grand scheme of things?" ( but for Ni its their own personal "big picture") The Ni is going to take a new experience and "draw it in" to their psyche. Then it will begin to compare, rather abstractly, it against its own dossier of impressions and try to see what patterns fit. Ne, on the other hand, "leaps to" a new experience taking that experience on its own terms and not necessarily comparing it to stored impressions ( maybe somewhat , Si after all) and Ne will see what potential paths exist from one experience to another one ( yet uninvestigated by the Ne).

For one example, personal experience with people and learned ideas about psychology together can teach Ni that humans are capable of deep dichotomies in thought and behavior. That principle exists in observing behaviors of anyone from a political tyrant to an innocent toddler. Knowing this is an attribute of human nature makes it possible to not assume a new person one meets will always behaves in a consistent manner. By observing the new person, Ni may notice hints of a dichotomy and so have greater ability to predict that the new person may behave in ways others could not predict because they based their expectations only on the specific, concrete interactions they have had with the person without looking for subtleties that could speak to this deeper truth about the complexity of human nature.

Good example. These accumulated past impressions speak very in favor of Ni. It also seems a lot like Jung's idea of the "collective unconscious" which seems to me to be some collective databank of human experiences that introverted perceivers can tap into. Regarding your dichotomies example about behavior I could see how I would look at it slightly differently than the Ni user. As a (probably) NeTi user I would accept that research has been done but my certitude of such dichotomies existing would be weaker. I probably wouldn't use it as a principle to evaluate behavior on. I'd rather observe how the person deals with reality and how they process hypotheticals to form a specific understanding of their behavior rather than trying to shoe them into a dichotomy I may think is certainly true. It's not implying that Ni types are not open minded (of course they are) its just that I think they tend to tunnel vision a bit more than others which can be great for focus but bad for considering outside perspective. Ne's can be scatter brained which is great for taking into account many perspectives and getting a more rounded observation but is bad when "taking a stand" about something.

 

[ZNP-TBA]

As far as I know, Ni uses EVERYTHING to form its vision. Anything and everything is subject to being caught up in the butterfly net that connects seemingly disparate items and distills from them some pattern, prediction, or method.

Everything in the subject's psyche, yes. Not everything outside of it though if anything at all. Don't mean to be nitpicky but that's very apparent in dealing with strong Ni users

 

[SearchingforPeace]

I know more than I consciously should know. I see things without trying to see things.

And I fed a ton of information to my databank from a young age.

Even so, when I suddenly understand something where I have zero prior experience, it gets freaky sometimes. I feel the collective unconscious idea has some possible validity.

I love multiple choice tests......I run Ni Fe hardcore at those puppies and breeze through them, even those all day type where all the answers are correct but one is most correct. Even with modest preparation.

Dario Nardi says that Ni in action uses the whole brain from his scans, going to flow like state. It may be true....

 

[Forever]

I love multiple choice tests......I run Ni Fe hardcore at those puppies and breeze through them, even those all day type where all the answers are correct but one is most correct. Even with modest preparation.

Explain how you use Fe on a multiple choice test.

 

[Hawthorne]

Explain how you use Fe on a multiple choice test.

"All these answers suck but this is the one they want from me so it's the one I'll give them even though I completely disagree with it."

 

[SearchingforPeace]

Explain how you use Fe on a multiple choice test.

Ni gives answers but Fe judges. It is a tandem that I go with the feeling of what is right.

Last year I did one of those extremely hard 6 hour multiple choice tests. I had not really studied that well. I finished 3 hours early, no one else out of the 300 or so finished before 5.5 hours( you couldn't leave early). And the questions were extremely difficult, multi-part with all the answers generally correct but one being the most correct. And I scored extremely well.

No one should be able to take the test and finish so fast.....it really was designed to take really smart people almost 6 hours. And truthfully, other people taking the test likely used logic and memorizing a massive list of rules to take the test. Those other people likely knew the material better (Si) and used rules and logic better to answer the questions (Te). Others used Ne and Ti to figure it out.

But I almost sense the thinking of the test maker. And feel which answer is correct.