User Tag List

Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Primer On Ni

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    673

    Default Primer On Ni

    A core tenet of American Socionics is that the "nuts and bolts of Jung's definitions for the functions control in Socionics." Naturally, Jung is the best resources for characteristics about Ni. Gulenko himself, after extensive study, finally conceded Stackemup Typologys point, socionics and mbti are both branches of Jung. The functions are defined by Jung and the main difference between MBTi and socionics is that socionics organizes Jung's functions into Model A (Krepinski) and contains intertype relations.

    To summarize Jung's definition of Ni, Ni is a rich, highly nuanced, detailed inner world that makes the outer world look like a needless distraction (or even somewhat non-existent). When Ni-doms find a way to bridge their inner world with the outer world, that's where you largely see them coming out of their inner world to interact with the external environment and what they bring is something original and unique. Reality is a canvas Ni imposes its imagination/inner world upon so what IEI brings to the world is typically a revolution in some form.

    NiFe (IEI) converts inner worlds into new modes of expression...NiTe (ILI) converts inner words into new modes of thought.

    Feel free to provide Jung's definition of Ni in your own words.
    Click here for my 2500+ Enneagram Type List to type yourself and others with. It's the only valid breakdown for every enneagram type, wing and stack.

    Click here for the only valid visual typing model of stackings on earth and socionics.
    Click here for enneagram type descriptions as a supplement to the only valid breakdown for every type, wing and stack.
    Click here for my typings of 100+ fictional exemplars and here for my typings of 90+ typology central members.
    Likes Fay liked this post

  2. #2

    Default

    I prefer an alternate definition to Ni (and all the functions for that matter). I'm not super familiar with Socionics (I'm not super interested either), but I am wondering if there is much crossover between various systems of typing.

    My preferred definition of Ni is something like this:

    As an intuitive function, it's abstract. As an introverted function, it's organized subjectively. As a perceiving function, it involves observations. Therefore, Ni is the subjective organization of abstract observations.


    In presentation, what Ni often looks like externally is the stacking of like symbolism (sometimes abstract observations aren't overtly symbolic, but may instead reference an intangible process that progresses linearly), usually following a central theme, or perhaps stacking one upon the last in a chapter book fashion. Sometimes Ni is represented visually as an end goal, but it's still inherently tethered to the central line of organized subjective abstractions.

    What are your thoughts on this definition? Is it compatible with Jung's?
    Likes highlander liked this post

  3. #3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tomb1 View Post
    To summarize Jung's definition of Ni, Ni is a rich, highly nuanced, detailed inner world that makes the outer world look like a needless distraction (or even somewhat non-existent). When Ni-doms find a way to bridge their inner world with the outer world, that's where you largely see them coming out of their inner world to interact with the external environment and what they bring is something original and unique. Reality is a canvas Ni imposes its imagination/inner world upon so what IEI brings to the world is typically a revolution in some form.
    I think this is accurate. Ni is probably the function hardest for people who don't value it to grasp, along with Ti. The thing about Ni - and this is controversial, I am aware - is that is has something mystical about it. By mystical I mean that it associates things in a non-causal way. By mystical I do not mean pertaining to "union with the godhead", which is the dictionary definition. I mean associative thinking, rather than causal. This appears mystical or random to others, indeed, it can be surprising to the Ni user as well. Ni has a rich inner world because it associates things, symbols, mental images, concepts which makes it quite unpredictable at times. Any expression of Ni puzzles modern society because our society is not used to such internal symbolism.

    NiFe (IEI) converts inner worlds into new modes of expression...NiTe (ILI) converts inner words into new modes of thought.
    IEI express their inner worlds through existing or new modes of expression. While IEIs don't invent necessarily these modes of expression, they apply them to circumstances that others wouldn't have thought of as inviting to such modes of expression. IEIs are diplomatic. EIEs are more often revolutionaries. IEIs have a softer approach to expressing their ideals (Ghandi).

    ILI are inventors or methods, or find creative ways to apply existing methods. Te isn't about "modes of thought", it isn't experienced by the user as such. Any extraverted function is always something that is acted on but not experienced internally. ILIs study problems as a process, their rich imaginations allow them to troubleshoot problems as they grow larger in the rear-view mirror. ILIs often give advice on how to do things, also on how to prevent problems because that is what Te does : it suggests procedures to people the Te user cares about. Where the IEI is looking at the human element, how to express their inner worlds through emotional impact, the ILI is looking to communicate procedures, knowledge and expertise that may be useful to those they care about or are looking to start relationships with.
    Likes Luminous, Sleeping Lotus liked this post

Similar Threads

  1. [Ni] i had this dream on ni and ne?
    By chado in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 03-07-2017, 06:06 PM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-01-2015, 08:51 AM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-09-2015, 01:25 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-04-2015, 08:36 PM
  5. Jung on Ni-doms: "y'all a bunch of crazies."
    By The Iron Giant in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 148
    Last Post: 01-07-2015, 06:36 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO