[Ni] Ni doms facts

[draon9]

Introverted intuition is basically personally vision of what people want or believe to happen. Since it is a subjective function you can have 2 ni users seeing 2 different visions for the future. It is not a realistic function the only reason it might be realistic is if it is influenced by te and fe and se because those function s are based on some form of reality . it is also good for telling se te fe to slow down so bad results will not happen. All extroverted functions are based on some form of reality. Since ni is a introverted perception function they do not believe in a wrong or right answer.

 

[Mind Maverick]

Kek

What are Ni Dom facts?

 

[Lib]

OK. Do you hear Yanny or Laurel with your non-subjective ears and brain?

Two different Ni users see the same reality only from a different angle, like everybody else.

 

[Quick]

Sure. An Ni Dom can be almost strictly Ni consciously and be Se, Te, Fe unconscious. This complicates things immensely since their outward manifestation of the unconscious has so many mixed signals, making typing an individual like this difficult.

The tricky thing about this is how Se manifests itself in this individual. Whether Se is simply unconscious or the addition of Te and Fe complicate this individuals type remains to be seen.

 

[Non_xsense]

I always fight with my intj dad 'cause his Ni is so subjetive that he can create things that doesn't exist .
But yeah Intj and entj are alot more Emotional than xNTP and sometimes in life you need that.

That is not creativity tho... P are alot more creative than J but J' are good for creating their point of views... most of the time wrong.

 

[Coriolis]

Kek

What are Ni Dom facts?

I would imagine this to be the visions or notions of what will happen that Ni produces. They can be considered facts in the same sense as my dislike of anchovies is a fact: it is the accurate expression of a subjective impression. I was going to use the word "judgment", but Ni of course isn't a judging function. The OP's statement that "they do not believe in a wrong or right answer" is correct in this sense. The right and wrong of it must be supplied by a judging function, here Fe or Te. For NTJs this is prompted by the stereotypical question "does it work", or if a prediction, did it really come to pass?

 

[Mind Maverick]

I would imagine this to be the visions or notions of what will happen that Ni produces. They can be considered facts in the same sense as my dislike of anchovies is a fact: it is the accurate expression of a subjective impression. I was going to use the word "judgment", but Ni of course isn't a judging function. The OP's statement that "they do not believe in a wrong or right answer" is correct in this sense. The right and wrong of it must be supplied by a judging function, here Fe or Te. For NTJs this is prompted by the stereotypical question "does it work", or if a prediction, did it really come to pass?

Theory ≠ Fact

 

[Lib]

Your choice of words confuses me, and the overall analysis doesn't sound objective, but more like your own subjective experience with a secondary Ni. You say that Ni slows down Fe, Se, Te to avoid unfavorable consequences, but if they are all so objective and in touch with reality, why would they need the subjective Ni to disturb them?

 

[Coriolis]

Theory ≠ Fact

Your point? It's a bit like asking whether Harry Potter is real.

 

[Mind Maverick]

Your point? It's a bit like asking whether Harry Potter is real.

More like pointing out an oxymoron.

 

[Turi]

Short, but accurate post.

• Touches on Introverted Intuitive types as the stereotypical "seer"-like figure, hence the "visions for the future".
• Incorporates how unrealistic intuition is especially in the introverted type.
• Accurately identifies Extraverted Feeling, Thinking and Sensation as having *some* basis in reality.
• Includes Intuition repressing Sensation, Thinking and Feeling hence "it is also good for telling se te fe to slow down so bad results will not happen".
• Correctly identifies intuition as an irrational function that does not make decisions, see: "Since ni is a introverted perception function they do not believe in a wrong or right answer."

Nice work.
There are what appears to be contradictions on the surface - ie, how can a function that doesn't make decisions (right or wrong answers) tell "se te fe to slow down" - though, I understand this is due to *perception* and not the end-result of a conscious, logical, thought-out process, such as simply perceiving a "warning", if you will, etc.

I dig it.

 

[Coriolis]

More like pointing out an oxymoron.

Nothing oxymoronic about it. Moreover, an Ni vision or "picture" is not a theory, any more than Starry Night is. My question about Harry Potter begs a follow-on question: a real what? He is obviously not a real flesh-and-blood human, but he is a real character in HP canon as written by J K Rowling. So we can ask: in what sense is something real, just as we can ask in what sense is something factual.

 

[Lib]

In this forum, people call facts whatever they like to. You can be a PhD in any field, no need to actually know facts.

 

[Coriolis]

In this forum, people call facts whatever they like to. You can be a PhD in any field, no need to actually know facts.

This forum hardly has a monopoly on that tendency. In fact, one is more likely to be called out on it here than in RL. Facts are just the starting point, though. Anyone can look up facts, though it is certainly handy to have commonly used ones at your fingertips. If all you know are facts, you don't have much. If you don't have facts, though, what you have may prove to be a house of cards that falls apart at the lightest touch. Expertise and credentials are yet two more considerations, related but not identical.

 

[Lib]

This forum hardly has a monopoly on that tendency. In fact, one is more likely to be called out on it here than in RL. Facts are just the starting point, though. Anyone can look up facts, though it is certainly handy to have commonly used ones at your fingertips. If all you know are facts, you don't have much. If you don't have facts, though, what you have may prove to be a house of cards that falls apart at the lightest touch. Expertise and credentials are yet two more considerations, related but not identical.

Well, I agree with you on that.

Yet, a fact is something that could be repeatedly observed under the same conditions. I don't think that OP subjective analysis on Ni dom makes the cut. For one, we don't know what are the conditions under which the analysis was made. I'd argue that everything that we experience is both subjective and objective, no matter what function we are using predominantly.

 

[Coriolis]

Well, I agree with you on that.

Yet, a fact is something that could be repeatedly observed under the same conditions. I don't think that OP subjective analysis on Ni dom makes the cut. For one, we don't know what are the conditions under which the analysis was made. I'd argue that everything that we experience is both subjective and objective, no matter what function we are using predominantly.

A fact is more like one data point: this happened one time, in this case. It takes a collection of facts (a data set) to support a conclusion. Chaotic behavior can also be described in a factual manner: today this happened; yesterday that happened.

To the extent that Ni visions are "facts" as I suggested, it is that the vision is real and an integral thing, much as Harry Potter is real as an element of that fictional universe. That fact alone, though, doesn't amount to much. It requires additional facts and some logical processing to have an impact in RL. I agree about our experiences having objective and subjective aspects, though the balance will differ greatly depending on the nature of the experience.

 

[Lib]

A fact is more like one data point: this happened one time, in this case. It takes a collection of facts (a data set) to support a conclusion. Chaotic behavior can also be described in a factual manner: today this happened; yesterday that happened.

To the extent that Ni visions are "facts" as I suggested, it is that the vision is real and an integral thing, much as Harry Potter is real as an element of that fictional universe. That fact alone, though, doesn't amount to much. It requires additional facts and some logical processing to have an impact in RL. I agree about our experiences having objective and subjective aspects, though the balance will differ greatly depending on the nature of the experience.

I thought we are mostly concerned with the meaning of Ni 'facts' here, less than with random occurrences of someone's impression on Ni. I'll give you that - everything that happens is a fact, and everything we experience is a fact to us, in some cases to others too. But that would engage full blown objectivism canceling out any validity of OP statement about the subjectivity of Ni.

What is really objective or subjective? The truth is only one but people see it from their position, which is indeed objective all factors considered. It is also subjective because our position/perception is limiting. Subjectivity is only an isolated case of objectivity. If two million people experience one event in the same way, does that make it more objective than one person's different experience of the same event?

 

[Coriolis]

I thought we are mostly concerned with the meaning of Ni 'facts' here, less than with random occurrences of someone's impression on Ni. I'll give you that - everything that happens is a fact, and everything we experience is a fact to us, in some cases to others too. But that would engage full blown objectivism canceling out any validity of OP statement about the subjectivity of Ni.

What is really objective or subjective? The truth is only one but people see it from their position, which is indeed objective all factors considered. It is also subjective because our position/perception is limiting. Subjectivity is only an isolated case of objectivity. If two million people experience one event in the same way, does that make it more objective than one person's different experience of the same event?

No. The objective/subjective split relates to the type of information about the event. The answers to the traditional "reporter questions" about the event are the objective part: who, what, where, when, how? The value judgments are the subjective part: it was significant, moving, counterproductive, not worth the money, etc.

 

[Lib]

No. The objective/subjective split relates to the type of information about the event. The answers to the traditional "reporter questions" about the event are the objective part: who, what, where, when, how? The value judgments are the subjective part: it was significant, moving, counterproductive, not worth the money, etc.

But if we follow this logic, then Ni can't be subjective because it isn't a judging function... So it's objective by default?

 

[BlueScreen]

My question about Harry Potter begs a follow-on question: a real what? He is obviously not a real flesh-and-blood human, but he is a real character in HP canon as written by J K Rowling. So we can ask: in what sense is something real, just as we can ask in what sense is something factual.

Interesting. For comparison, as an Ne dom, my first question was "Which Harry Potter?" even though it is obvious which you meant. Still as dom intuitives we both had a first instinct to open up the problem by questioning parts of it rather than just accept it. I instinctively went for the external question of who and looked to create uncertainty where there really was none, whereas you've delved deeper into the meaning of real and questioned what/which reality, which I might have done further down the track once I'd questioned and verified the context. I actually quite like your approach because it shows an insight that even the concept of "reality" isn't something set in stone.