How To Discern Extraverted vs Introverted Intuition

[highlander]

I have noticed that the Kiersey Jung Test could give better results on Ni vs. Ne. People are tending to score high on both or low on both including not as much differentiation as I'd hoped. I would like to try and improve them. These are the respective lists of questions which are indicative of each function being used. Any thoughts or opinions on how to improve them?

Ne
I notice patterns as they surface and trust they will go somewhere
I enjoy playing with random interconnections and patterns
I keep following tangents and new ideas without limiting myself to one
I am constantly generating new ideas and creative ways of doing things
I wonder what else is possible
I grasp what is going on behind the scenes and under the surface
I consider possibilities that I may or may not act on
I play hunches and trust my intuition
I think about the present and how it affects the future
I'm good at picking up at emerging patterns

Ni
I try to foresee the implications and likely effects
I come up with new ways of seeing things
When solving problems, I frequently have an "aha" moment which seems to come out of nowhere
I'm good at synthesizing a lot of information, understanding complex patterns and arriving at insights
I develop a fundamental change in the approach or underlying assumptions
I think about the long range future
If I get a new insight, it energizes me
I search for the most important patterns and themes to understand meaning and significance
I envision solutions to problems that others haven't yet recognized
I come up with new ideas or perspectives by synthesizing various opposing points of view

 

[Fidelia]

I've found Ne is great at magpie-ing. That is finding distinct tidbits of info that are appropriate to the situation at hand and it recalls well where it got them. Ni is more of a mulcher. Lots of ideas and sources go into the mix to be transformed into a new product.

Ni is great at recognizing what could be and helping with creating vision for what could be. It's why I like teaching grade four, five and six, where I can impact what is possible at a formative time, and also affect how students see themselves. Ne users would be the people who see what is and how it could be maximized or used in novel ways. They would be better with adults or older students who are more resistant to change or for making impacting changes in a person or group dynamic quickly by optimizing what's already there. It develops what is, rather than transforming or fundamentally changing. Ne can create instant results. Ni ideas require more time and would be more likely to focus on underlying principles or a grand vision. Ne is impressive but limited. Ni changes the world in a big way when it works, but is cumbersome, sometimes impractical and much slower.

Most ni theorists or writers need some kind of person who can popularize their ideas. Ne users make great editors etc and have a great sense of where something will fir best or be most successful.


These are just a few thoughts or observations made between the ni Doms and ne Doms I know personally. Don't know how much aux function influences it though.

 

[meowington]

Ni
I envision solutions to problems that others haven't yet recognized

So true. The downside to this is that others will sometimes never even know what tragedies you just prevented. *whines*

Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else can see. ~ Schopenhauer

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

Thanks for this thread. It is useful to spend more time on the perceiving functions. It's interesting how most discussions are about judging functions. I'm definitely in the position of scoring high for both Ni and Ne, and so not having a clear sense of the distinctions. I also wonder how to keep N descriptions clearly separate from T. For a long time I saw the N functions as analytical and some of the literature and description implies this, but it is important to be sure its intangible nature doesn't make the descriptions rely on an analytical framework. Both have to do with the subconscious processing, and so lack deliberate analytical processing.

I think the emphasis on the present for Ne and the future, or longer-term for Ni is a good distinction. Perhaps there is also a contrast in how personalized the process is. Since Ne is external, it may be more likely to play with patterns without personal relevance. The connections don't require individual meaning, they aren't tied to an inner construct of reality.

I'm also curious about whether there is a difference in the types of material that are processed. Do both process external events equally or is one more internally directed shaping the sense of self. Jung refers to Ne being a function used in politics and gaining a sense of what is going on in external systems in the world. However, I think some of the most prominent conspiracy theorists and such who focus entirely on the external world, are using Ni to construct a singular vision of what is happening. Some of the examples Jung uses for Ni has to do with having an intuition about the individual's own inner workings, so it becomes part of the concept of self. Does Ne have a way of perceiving and defining Self that is distinct from Ni? The question is how does Ni and Ne perceive external events vs. how does Ni and Ne perceive inner workings of Self?

How do both functions approach imagination? Some people construct inner worlds of imagination, like Tolkien, and some people get fragmentary imaginative impressions. Would the more complex version be Ni or could it be Ne? Or another function? The way two perceiving functions interact? Or would the complex inner connected world of that type of imagination be a way of internalizing the systems Ne perceives? Or is it exactly an example of Ni? My sister creates complex imaginary worlds with backstories, but they are about other characters and ideas that are an extension of her personality, but not specially defining her as a person. My imagination is more sudden impressions that are unplanned, but are very individual about a single character I identify with, or about specific, individual emotions another person experiences. My imagination is not system-based. A good question to add is what is the difference between Ni and Ne imagination?

What is the role of certitude between the two functions? Can both have varying degrees, or is Ni more certain in its impressions and Ne more open-ended? That would be the first assumption, but Ne could have certitude in the short-term, but less in the long-term, and Ni less certitude until its process is completed?

Anyone have ideas on any of these points?

 

[Smilephantomhive]

Maybe make a question about divergence (Ne) and convergence (Ni).

 

[ZNP-TBA]

For Ni and Se types, do you ever find your Ni and Se in a sort of "tug-o-war?"

I see it frequently with my Ne/Si axis. Having some semblance of Si I often find myself wanting to master something like some kind of skill or some particular bit of knowledge. I can 'see' myself going 'all-in' and often conjure up, ahead of time, the ways I would go about doing that. I know I have to stay dedicated to it and eventually I will become much better at it. But somewhere in the process I get disinterested (typically bored or distracted) and I find something else I want to 'master.' I also get really excited at first but the excitement doesn't always persist. I always find myself, whether I like it or not, back in a place where I'm not devoted to a particular path but rather at the point of convergence between many paths and I casually stroll each of those paths at my leisure.

 

[ChocolateMoose123]

[MENTION=25403]ZNP-TBA[/MENTION]

Im not a ni dom, but I think of it less like a tug of war, more like a two way valve. When I think of tug of war, I think of resistence or struggle. I think there is more of a crossing guard aspect. Put the stop sign up for one, so the other can pass. Then repeat. They join eventually on the other side.

 

[ZNP-TBA]

[MENTION=25403]ZNP-TBA[/MENTION]

Im not a ni dom, but I think of it less like a tug of war, more like a two way valve. When I think of tug of war, I think of resistence or struggle. I think there is more of a crossing guard aspect. Put the stop sign up for one, so the other can pass. Then repeat. They join eventually on the other side.

For you the divergence would be more significant with Ti and Fe wouldn't it?

I think my Ti/Fe work more like you describe which would make sense being aux and tert functions. For me though, the Ne/Si is a bit of a struggle since my Si impulses are typically overridden by Ne habits.

 

[highlander]

Maybe make a question about divergence (Ne) and convergence (Ni).

I had the same thought. What would the questions be - in a simple way that won't confuse people?

Both have to do with the subconscious processing, and so lack deliberate analytical processing.

Do you think there are questions that could be asked related to this and the differences between introverted and extraverted orientation?

I think the emphasis on the present for Ne and the future, or longer-term for Ni is a good distinction.

Interestingly, I weakened the focus on this because what I found is the INFJs did not have the same type of long term future orientation as much as the INTJs and so the questions were not working. I'm still a little torn on this. As an INTJ, I am totally about the long term and it is a distinguishing characteristic of all my thinking.

Perhaps there is also a contrast in how personalized the process is. Since Ne is external, it may be more likely to play with patterns without personal relevance. The connections don't require individual meaning, they aren't tied to an inner construct of reality.

I'm also curious about whether there is a difference in the types of material that are processed. Do both process external events equally or is one more internally directed shaping the sense of self. Jung refers to Ne being a function used in politics and gaining a sense of what is going on in external systems in the world. However, I think some of the most prominent conspiracy theorists and such who focus entirely on the external world, are using Ni to construct a singular vision of what is happening. Some of the examples Jung uses for Ni has to do with having an intuition about the individual's own inner workings, so it becomes part of the concept of self. Does Ne have a way of perceiving and defining Self that is distinct from Ni? The question is how does Ni and Ne perceive external events vs. how does Ni and Ne perceive inner workings of Self?

What questions can you think we could ask related to this for Ni vs Ne?

How do both functions approach imagination? Some people construct inner worlds of imagination, like Tolkien, and some people get fragmentary imaginative impressions. Would the more complex version be Ni or could it be Ne? Or another function? The way two perceiving functions interact? Or would the complex inner connected world of that type of imagination be a way of internalizing the systems Ne perceives? Or is it exactly an example of Ni? My sister creates complex imaginary worlds with backstories, but they are about other characters and ideas that are an extension of her personality, but not specially defining her as a person. My imagination is more sudden impressions that are unplanned, but are very individual about a single character I identify with, or about specific, individual emotions another person experiences. My imagination is not system-based. A good question to add is what is the difference between Ni and Ne imagination?

That's an interesting angle. Gets back to the convergence/divergence thing.

What is the role of certitude between the two functions? Can both have varying degrees, or is Ni more certain in its impressions and Ne more open-ended? That would be the first assumption, but Ne could have certitude in the short-term, but less in the long-term, and Ni less certitude until its process is completed?

It does have more certitude for me. I do rely on these intuitions. They come in the forum of a conclusion of sorts and it almost feels judgy to me. It would be helpful if someone who experiences Ne would comment on how it works for them.

For Ni and Se types, do you ever find your Ni and Se in a sort of "tug-o-war?"

I see it frequently with my Ne/Si axis. Having some semblance of Si I often find myself wanting to master something like some kind of skill or some particular bit of knowledge. I can 'see' myself going 'all-in' and often conjure up, ahead of time, the ways I would go about doing that. I know I have to stay dedicated to it and eventually I will become much better at it. But somewhere in the process I get disinterested (typically bored or distracted) and I find something else I want to 'master.' I also get really excited at first but the excitement doesn't always persist. I always find myself, whether I like it or not, back in a place where I'm not devoted to a particular path but rather at the point of convergence between many paths and I casually stroll each of those paths at my leisure.

I don't know if it is a tug of war but this raises an interesting possibility in the line of questioning in whether or not it is reasonable to ask questions which are related to using tandem functions vs. just focusing on the one function such as Ni or Ne itself. The assumption would be there that we actually do use functions in tandem which I know is the theory but how this actually manifests, I have not seen a lot written about.

 

[Bush]

One question to ask, using these lists as one anchor of sorts -- how many Ne'ers here actually relate to each of the items in t he Ne list? In fact, what about Ne'ers and the items in the Ni list? (If a lot of them relate to a particular Ni item, then that item is likely not measuring what it's trying to measure.)

Apply to the Ni folks as well of course

 

[PeaceBaby]

Any thoughts or opinions on how to improve them?

The first thing that strikes me, without spending much time in reflection, is that these three statements are problematic:

When solving problems, I frequently have an "aha" moment which seems to come out of nowhere - this is true of most humans, never mind Ni doms, so it isn't a good barometer of Ni-style intuition specifically from a quiz perspective.

If I get a new insight, it energizes me - Ne feels the same way, it's the juice, so this is not exclusive to Ni, and every Ne user would probably check that box.

I'm good at synthesizing a lot of information, understanding complex patterns and arriving at insights - I agree with the magpie - mulcher comparison ( [MENTION=7111]fidelia[/MENTION] ), but that doesn't mean Ni is inherently taking in more information, and I think the idea of synthesis / aggregation get conflated somewhat. Ni can be a silo and goes very deep but the focus, almost by necessity, has to be narrow from an energetic investment. Ne is broadly exploratory and from my perspective, aggregates far more raw data, but Ne seldom processes that in an Ni - type way. It's like having thousands of puzzle pieces but never taking the time to sit down and see what the puzzle makes. Maybe you actually have the pieces to three puzzles in there, and they are seldom sorted or categorized in a way that makes them useful.

I also like the metaphor of a shotgun vs a rifle. Ne the shotgun, Ni the rifle. Both can get the job done I suppose, but aiming Ne can be like targetting the broad side of a barn.

 

[ZNP-TBA]

[MENTION=8936]highlander[/MENTION]

I don't know if it is a tug of war but this raises an interesting possibility in the line of questioning in whether or not it is reasonable to ask questions which are related to using tandem functions vs. just focusing on the one function such as Ni or Ne itself. The assumption would be there that we actually do use functions in tandem which I know is the theory but how this actually manifests, I have not seen a lot written about.

I accept the axis theory of functions because it looks at using functions more like a scale and not explicitly one or the other. People are dynamic enough that all these functions come into play at certain degrees in a person's experience. From what I understand about Si I notice it everyday in my persona even though it's not my dominant function.

More Ne comes at the expense of Si (vice versa is true) but the Ne/Si user no matter where they are on the axis have the same kind of general perception (abstract view of reality but concrete impression of it) but differences arise when that perception is processed.

 

[cascadeco]

The first thing that strikes me, without spending much time in reflection, is that these three statements are problematic:

When solving problems, I frequently have an "aha" moment which seems to come out of nowhere - this is true of most humans, never mind Ni doms, so it isn't a good barometer of Ni-style intuition specifically from a quiz perspective.

If I get a new insight, it energizes me - Ne feels the same way, it's the juice, so this is not exclusive to Ni, and every Ne user would probably check that box.

I'm good at synthesizing a lot of information, understanding complex patterns and arriving at insights - I agree with the magpie - mulcher comparison ( [MENTION=7111]fidelia[/MENTION] ), but that doesn't mean Ni is inherently taking in more information, and I think the idea of synthesis / aggregation get conflated somewhat. Ni can be a silo and goes very deep but the focus, almost by necessity, has to be narrow from an energetic investment. Ne is broadly exploratory and from my perspective, aggregates far more raw data, but Ne seldom processes that in an Ni - type way. It's like having thousands of puzzle pieces but never taking the time to sit down and see what the puzzle makes. Maybe you actually have the pieces to three puzzles in there, and they are seldom sorted or categorized in a way that makes them useful.

I also like the metaphor of a shotgun vs a rifle. Ne the shotgun, Ni the rifle. Both can get the job done I suppose, but aiming Ne can be like targetting the broad side of a barn.

Yeah, similarly, I'm a pretty awful Ne user, but these elements on the Ne list I can relate to --

I grasp what is going on behind the scenes and under the surface
I consider possibilities that I may or may not act on
I play hunches and trust my intuition (not really sure re this one, I mean, I don't think I 'play' hunches; however I will pay attention to them)
I think about the present and how it affects the future

----------

I think it's because they're fairly 'generic' and 'human' imo.

Also, looking at the Ni list, while I can relate to some, I can also say it's probably a good thing I no longer type as Ni-dom, because I definitely don't see that stuff as where I 'sit' the longest / ie it's not my ego base at all, and in that sense many of the statements aren't highly relatable. So I'll have to defer to Ni dom/aux on the Ni list.

 

[1487610420]

I have noticed that the Kiersey Jung Test could give better results on Ni vs. Ne. People are tending to score high on both or low on both including not as much differentiation as I'd hoped. I would like to try and improve them. These are the respective lists of questions which are indicative of each function being used. Any thoughts or opinions on how to improve them?

Ne
I notice patterns as they surface and trust they will go somewhere
I enjoy playing with random interconnections and patterns
I keep following tangents and new ideas without limiting myself to one
I am constantly generating new ideas and creative ways of doing things
I wonder what else is possible
I grasp what is going on behind the scenes and under the surface
I consider possibilities that I may or may not act on
I play hunches and trust my intuition
I think about the present and how it affects the future
I'm good at picking up at emerging patterns

Ni
I try to foresee the implications and likely effects
I come up with new ways of seeing things
When solving problems, I frequently have an "aha" moment which seems to come out of nowhere
I'm good at synthesizing a lot of information, understanding complex patterns and arriving at insights
I develop a fundamental change in the approach or underlying assumptions
I think about the long range future
If I get a new insight, it energizes me
I search for the most important patterns and themes to understand meaning and significance
I envision solutions to problems that others haven't yet recognized
I come up with new ideas or perspectives by synthesizing various opposing points of view

When typology is new, it can be fascinatingly easy to pigeonhole, but after enough time, I don't really think that static approach works anymore.

 

[highlander]

When typology is new, it can be fascinatingly easy to pigeonhole, but after enough time, I don't really think that static approach works anymore.

Well it's a test. The idea is to type people based on the functions they prefer to use.
The most helpful feedback would be these questions are bad. Try these questions instead.

 

[Luke O]

One question to ask, using these lists as one anchor of sorts -- how many Ne'ers here actually relate to each of the items in t he Ne list? In fact, what about Ne'ers and the items in the Ni list? (If a lot of them relate to a particular Ni item, then that item is likely not measuring what it's trying to measure.)

Apply to the Ni folks as well of course

As a Ne'er (Ne'er do well?) I relate to everything in the Ne list and some of the Ni list. My job helps me develop both (Data Analyst), especially the Ni part. I naturally live in the present but I'm getting better at forward planning.

 

[Zero-11]

Sensing people process data with their five senses, so the Introverted Sensing function allows a person to remember data in detail and be able to compare it to the current data. It is the ability to link present experiences to past experiences in search for a connection.

with Ni you ain't doing that

 

[Evo]

[MENTION=25763]Enthusiastic_Dreamer[/MENTION] Would you rather have a blank piece of paper or one with something to start off of?

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

Well it's a test. The idea is to type people based on the functions they prefer to use.
The most helpful feedback would be these questions are bad. Try these questions instead.

I'll think through the ideas I threw out earlier.

One issue with testing type is that the questions may need to be mutually exclusive traits to best test for a function. There are similarities between Ne and Ni, so the specific, defining question may contain elements of similarity, but would need to be chosen as traits that are unlikely to be paired. This is one reason the present vs. future orientation could be a good question, and it seems to fit with the differences, although Ne may have some future orientation.

On a related note: when I took the personality test you created, I got an ENFP result, which isn't necessarily way off, but I remember that on some screens I identified with all four questions, so my choice ended up having a somewhat random element to it. It is difficult to parse out the mutually exclusive aspects of these categories because from what I understand, they do overlap in theory. There may be a way to design questions that contrast generalized Sensing vs. intuition, which could include the similarities between Ne and Ni, and then additional questions that contain the mutually exclusive traits between Ne and Ni.

I'll try to come back an be more specific.

 

[OrangeAppled]

From a Ne perspective, Ni looks much "narrower" and less exploratory (more, er, closed), which is generally the case with extroverted vs introverted functions. The extroverted viewpoint rarely sees itself as lacking anything the introverted one does, because it takes certain things for granted, but the introverted perspective often will be aware it goes deeper yet has less immediate real world application (being more conceptual...Jung describes Ni types as appearing fruitless, and gives similar descriptions for all the introverted types).

I think of how Fe is good for making judgements that affect real time value of the human experience (ie applying value concepts, which are somewhat taken for granted as objective), whereas Fi is about creating/refining value concepts (not taking for granted the external value concepts). Similar idea with Ne and Ni. Ne is about exploring different perspectives, whereas Ni will strive to see whether a perspective is worth exploring, because it doesn't take for granted that deeper change will come from a particular perspective. Without the rational functions, iNtuition is fickle, meaning the "goal" is to change for its own sake; Ne can seek to change the object just to see where it can go, and Ni can seek to change the subject (it's own perspective & that of others) just to see how that will alter the course of reality in a very fundamental way. It's the rational functions that bring purpose beyond that.

I would say Ni doesn't take all perspectives for granted as simply different slices of objective reality whereas Ne can take them all for granted, suggesting it just depends on the angle; Ni instead seems to seek what may be the most useful perspective for a particular future development (ie change - iNtuition is focused on "where things are going" not "what they are"). I think this is why it is associated with vision more than ideas, and why this requires a kind of "blocking out" that can annoy Ne types (ie looks "narrow"). The Ni attitude is skeptical in many ways compared to the Ne attitude. Classic creative thinking usually sounds like Ne for this reason, and Ne often comes across as more positive and Ni more critical (common distinction with I/E functions again).

Introverted functions are generally about forming a concept using the inner world. Si is about building a concept of what reality is like in a literal way (can be skeptical of what is unfamiliar/uncertain), whereas Se is the experience of reality as it unfolds (which takes reality for granted). Fi is about forming a concept of what is valuable to the human experience (can be skeptical of what they're told is important), Fe is about applying value concepts to the human experience (takes value concepts for granted). Ti is about forming a concept of how things work in a logical sense (aka a system to explain how reality functions - skeptical about what is really true or that a system is consistent, etc), and Te is about applying logical concepts to set goals & achieve ends (takes for granted certain things as factual or logical). Going with this... Ni is about forming a concept of how reality develops under certain assumptions/interpretations (skeptical that current or suggested ideas or ways of framing things will lead to any change), whereas Ne is about exploring possible interpretations (aka assumptions - but many! as many as it can!) for reality that can lead to change (takes for granted that these possibilities are, well, possibilities, or that they will lead to any deeper change).

I think to deter Ne types from choosing Ni answers (as well as all extroverted preferences from finding introverted answers appealing, ie Fe types choosing Fi answers, Te types choosing Ti answers, etc), you may have to touch on the stuff the extroverted attitude doesn't really value. It will seem superfluous to them because they take aspects of it for granted, and it may appear narrow and dismissive towards some of what they are taking for granted.