[Ni] How does Ni work? some thoughts

[Daedalus]

A post by Coriolis in the "Ask an INTJ" thread made me think about some possible explanation about how Ni works. The following is my take on how Ni works.

Needless to say that this is but my view regarding this and could be way off target/wrong. Feel free to chime in with suggestions/questions/alternate explanations.

I'll begin with the Quote I initially started to reply to.
---------------------------------

Ni obviously does not operate in a vacuum. As I mentioned, it is influenced by all my experiences, everything I have learned, observed, or understood. This includes not only previous ideas, but other ideas suggested by those ideas, later versions of those ideas, evolving interpretations, etc. Yes, change is large part of what Ni perceives, but the focus is on how it all comes together in the present: how the convolution of all relevant changes leads to the existing situation, and more importantly, to the future. It is a bit like taking a derivative, where we measure not the value of some property at a specific point in time, but rather how that property is changing at that moment. Another way to look at it is to contrast Ne's view of current external ideas with Ni's view of current internal ideas.

Great points and I agree wholeheartedly. From what I have been able to gather from analyzing my Ni over the years, I have come to a similar conclusion. (Which might be subject to change..further disclaimers etc etc)

As you pointed out, I too have noticed that Ni is not something "magical" but is actually the result of processing done in the unconscious surfacing to the conscious mind. I believe this is one of the fundamental differences between Ni and Ne. Ni is not about objects but about the interconnection between objects. Or to be more accurate, an INTJ would Abstract away objects altogether and concentrate on their functions/how they interact with the system. NE, imho seems to concentrate more about the objects than some unifying underlying quality which can be filtered from these objects.

Ni would look at pots/cups/toys made from clay and abstract away the objects, concentrating on "clay" and its properties. Let’s call this the “clayness” . When the INTJ encounters another object made out of clay in the future..(eg; clay oven) the Ni would unconsciously use the “clayness” quality of all things made out of clay to predict how/and what this clay oven will do/interact with other things around it.

As others have mentioned...Ni synthesizes information to arrive at ONE answer for a problem(real life or imaginary ). I hasten to add that Ni sometimes gives more than one answer (eg: say..maybe 5). An INTJ would then run Te over these answers and eliminate the ones that fail, resulting in one answer OR an answer that is slightly modified/fine tuned from the Initial version spewn out by Ni.

The external world is not really “real” to the INTJ in the sense that it is but one “possible version/reality” and is subject to change all the time. Change is probably one of the very few constants thus the INTJ comes to distrust concrete “definitions” due to their oxymoronic nature( How does one define something with absolute certainty when everything in this world/universe is in a constant state of flux?).I have noticed this to be an issue that causes misunderstandings/miscommunication when dealing with other types, especially INTP’s. I hate to find concrete definitions for things because internally I find the notion very troubling, whereas the INTP with whom I am conversing with might find my reluctance a form of dismissal.

Ni: An internal framework of connections between qualities/attributes?

INTJ’s tend to accumulate these “connections” (eg : “clayness”) over the years into an intricate internal framework. However this framework is Not a framework of connections between objects, but imho is more of a connections between qualities/attributes. Imagine a 3D net, with a perfect sphere on each of the intersections. Also let us assume that there are an infinite number of intersections. ( such a net with infinite reflecting spheres is known as the “Indras net" in Hindu/Buddhist philosophy btw). Each sphere reflects all other spheres on the framework. This is analogous to a framework of connections.

One sphere could be “clayness” , another could be “wetness”. The image of the “wetness” sphere reflected on the “clayness” sphere would be a connection between “wetness + clayness”. Thus an INTJ when encountering mud for the first time, could make accurate predictions about its attributes/what it might do almost instantaneously (which he then passes through the Te filter to eliminate incorrect/impractical answers). This I believe is what Ni does.


Let us look at a real world example. Imagine an INTJ looking at some objects made out of clay, and some other objects/states of water.

The INTJ starts extracting what he/she thinks to be the essential qualities of the aforementioned stuff and filing them away in its internal network of connections.

In the following image, the "reflections" of other spheres on a sphere is the "influences" other qualities represented by those spheres have on the quality represented by the sphere we are considering.

Each sphere is reflected on every other sphere. What I mean to imply by this image is that qualities/attributes all have some “effect” on everything else in the system. Sometimes the effect is very strong, sometimes microscopically small.

The main advantage of this form of organization imho is that it allows the Ni to “switch its Pov at will”. For example it could look at a problem from the viewpoint if sphere 1. However if it decides that the problem would be better solved from a different view, it could switch to sphere 2 instantaneously without a need to re-compute all the connections again. (Edited to add: or the INTJ could also look at the same sphere from another angle..noting a different set of reflections on the surface, thus pointing at a different set of influences)The framework of connections (spheres in this example), is built over a lifetime, and cannot be re-built from scratch at will.

There is a system of “weights” given to the connections between the spheres as well. In other words, these “weighted connections” allows the INTJ to quickly asses the relative influences each sphere will have on a problem at hand and eliminate almost all but about 4 or 5 factors(spheres, and their interconnection’s) which might influence the current problem they are working on.


However as the INTJ learns new things/figures out connections between things they keep on adding these to the framework. This results in spheres being added, existing spheres getting modified, or the ‘weights” of the connections getting updated.

Te will then go over the answers thrown up by Ni to quickly eliminate the ones which are wrong. The resulting answer will then be the one selected.

I have to add that sometimes the resulting answer will be a slightly modified version of the initial one given by the Ni. While going over the answers Te would find some errors, which will then be fed into the internal framework. These changes will probably result in some minor tweaks to the framework…for example the weights given to the connections might be changed a bit…or some factor could be added to the milieu. Ni now pops a more “correct” answer which is filtered by Te again.

In my opinion Te sees to check for “errors”. It does not “prove” that the answer is correct. It only shows that the answer is “not wrong” .

What was meant to be a short post grew into a super lengthy one

 

[RaptorWizard]

Ni works within spiritual cranks and mystics, the masters of magicka.
idk really lol

 

[Kayness]

Yep, I deffo use Ni.

 

[RaptorWizard]

Yep, I deffo use Ni.

I would be interested if you explained how Ni manifests in your personality, and I am also sure the thread starter would like to hear how it works for you, if you care to elaborate.

 

[Eugene Watson VIII]

I read somewhere something like "an INTJ's leading function will not work with the triangle but instead come up with an entirely new triangle". Thanks for the article. Should I add that an INxJs breakthroughs might already exist or be completely useless?

 

[Kayness]

I would be interested if you explained how Ni manifests in your personality, and I am also sure the thread starter would like to hear how it works for you, if you care to elaborate.

well, some Ni doms I come across on PerC would have us believe that Ni is this mystical function that magically bestows them with knowledge or enables them to see into the future or something. Even Jung said something similar in his description, "without this type of people, there would be no prophets of Israel" or something like that, but of course that wasn't written in a glorifying tone. But I feel like my Ni is just based on the object and my database of properties surrounding it - there's really no magic or whatever related to it at all.

the only scenarios that I can think of right now in which I most use my Ni are mostly the ones involving people & interpersonal relations. Like, I have seen how things played out in the past, what triggered what chain of events or reactions, and all these are stored into this database. Then when I see something similar happening, I pull out information from the database to build a framework in which to anticipate & prepare for the outcome. Usually it involves pulling out bits and pieces of information I gathered from different events and put them together to form my projection of the event.

However, this is only a part of it because in the end I'm always going to defer to the information that I receive in real time. I'm obviously not as attached to it as Ni doms; I've seen a few instances where the INTJs in my life are pretty much running on their own impressions even when there are solid, observable, external indications to the otherwise.

bleh I dunno i'm kinda tired and it's hard to explain and I cant think of any specifics right now. hope it's not too confusing.

 

[Daedalus]

Ni works within spiritual cranks and mystics, the masters of magicka.
idk really lol

Abracadabra!

 

[Coriolis]

In my opinion Te sees to check for “errors”. It does not “prove” that the answer is correct. It only shows that the answer is “not wrong”

In my experience, Te measures the Ni perceptions against some external context or constraints. It does not so much check for rightness as for causality and workability: will the perceived solution work in the current circumstance? How likely is the perceived prediction actually to come to pass given what is really happening in the outside world?

Should I add that an INxJs breakthroughs might already exist or be completely useless?

Both can happen. The completely useless should fail the Te-testing stage. Every now and then, though, I am a bit disappointed when I come up with what I consider a truly innovative and unique idea/solution, only to find out someone else already thought of it. If it is still the best solution, though, I still implement it.

 

[UniqueMixture]

Ni pulls together fragments of various memories, especially visual stimuli and combines it in such a way so that it is "harmonius" decreasing the cognitive load of the snippets so they can be experienced simultaneously

 

[Kalach]

I think all intuition anticipates sensing.

Looked at that way, Ni is the work of knowing ahead of time what can come up in the moment. This is the same as saying "Ni is a rejection of Se". Instead of deigning to experience the physical moment, one sits back to draw up some collage of what is in all moments.

Obviously this collage is haunted by what experiences you haven't had, what books you didn't read, all the things you don't know. Major efforts go into examining what you are aware of and drawing out themes and images that can be timelessly projected into the future to create foreknowledge.

As to how that happens...

 

[Daedalus]

I read somewhere something like "an INTJ's leading function will not work with the triangle but instead come up with an entirely new triangle". Thanks for the article. Should I add that an INxJs breakthroughs might already exist or be completely useless?

I have experienced the completely useless scenarios you mention...as Coriolis mentioned in his reply to your post, there were times when I thought "yes! this would work!" only to see it fail miserably when running the Ni 'answer" through the Te filter. This happens very rarely, but the fact that this does happen makes me Te test all my Ni answers. Often Te filtering does not take long as we are only testing if the answer would work in the given situation. So I would say all Ni users should use Te to test the answers their Ni dredges up before acting upon them

I believe that some of the Ni doms who tend to be extremely paranoid/conspiracy theorists seem to let every Ni result run its course. I think of Ni as a wild horse sometimes...if and when reined in by Te, its really useful and lets us do things fast, however when not reined it...it takes us for a wild wild ride. Worse...such an Ni would let subsequent Ni answers feed off of his previous untested answers...resulting in some heavy duty paranoia/conspiracy theories.

 

[Daedalus]

well, some Ni doms I come across on PerC would have us believe that Ni is this mystical function that magically bestows them with knowledge or enables them to see into the future or something. Even Jung said something similar in his description, "without this type of people, there would be no prophets of Israel" or something like that, but of course that wasn't written in a glorifying tone. But I feel like my Ni is just based on the object and my database of properties surrounding it - there's really no magic or whatever related to it at all.

In a way those explanations are somewhat right on the money, because even though I try finding an explanation for how Ni works, I do not do all the "work" in an observable fashion in my mind. When a problem is presented and Ni is triggered...an answer (or a sequence of 'answers") pop up in the mind. It is possible, using Te to go back and validate them...and later when we have time also try to figure out how we arrived at these answers. Often its impossible(at least for me) to figure out why and how those "answers" popped up in the first place.

One explanation I can think of is that because the framework of connections is pretty tangled, its impossible for the conscious mind to try to unravel this Gordian-ish knot. it is much much easier/faster to simply use Te to verify if the solution is workable for the problem at hand.

Coupled with the "compelling' nature of the Ni, I usually go
"Ok let me test this answer with te => it works =>is a valid solution for this problem==> end".

Also I think Ni does not always get results from connected-topics to form an answer. Sometimes even seemingly totally unrelated information can play a part..even a significant one. Some reference from a Tom&Jerry cartoon used as a piece of information in formulating an answer to some engineering problem? Very possible!

the only scenarios that I can think of right now in which I most use my Ni are mostly the ones involving people & interpersonal relations. Like, I have seen how things played out in the past, what triggered what chain of events or reactions, and all these are stored into this database. Then when I see something similar happening, I pull out information from the database to build a framework in which to anticipate & prepare for the outcome. Usually it involves pulling out bits and pieces of information I gathered from different events and put them together to form my projection of the event.

For me it’s different. I mostly do not have conscious control over Ni processes.

Usually works like this

Problem needing a solution => Ni pops out an answer(s) => I run Te over it => Te either eliminates the unfit ones and chooses the correct Ni answer OR Te comes with some bugs/problems in the answers => This information is now defined as the "new problem" (Or rather the same problem with the Te discoveries included) => Problem needing a solution => Ni pops up answer(s)


^^ this loop continues till solution found. Often it only takes one or two runs.

I believe this is also where the INTJ's contingency planning reputation comes in.

Contingency == "Bug'/Problem found by Te

^^ when we run into some unforeseen problem with our plans, we run Te over it, which defines the problem (mostly adds the few new variables/changes) and pass it onto Ni. Which throws out an answer.

Often when running Te over certain Ni answers we do a "what if scenario' and have Ni find a solution for it, just in case.

However, this is only a part of it because in the end I'm always going to defer to the information that I receive in real time. I'm obviously not as attached to it as Ni doms; I've seen a few instances where the INTJs in my life are pretty much running on their own impressions even when there are solid, observable, external indications to the otherwise.

bleh I dunno i'm kinda tired and it's hard to explain and I cant think of any specifics right now. hope it's not too confusing.

Nah, I get what you mean. Some of us INTJ's tend to not use Te to check the Ni answer and end up being a bit out of touch with reality. However, there are times when our answers seem very correct to us(even after running Te over them) that we are under a sort-of-compulsion to make them work. It might seem kinda quirky to others but as Ni is often not easily explained, the INTJ's run the risk of being seen as acting contrary to reason.

For example when I meet a new person, I might observe something in the way he interacts with others that might trigger a Ni response that says "this guy is not trustworthy". Of course I can run Te over it...but as it’s hard to prove/disprove this “hunch” empirically...I am left with the option of trusting my Ni or not. So how do I choose? I look at past history..and note that my Ni 'hunches' were mostly correct..thus I err on the side of statistics and chose to trust my Ni "hunch' about that guy.

PS:
Once a friend of mine introduced me to her friends. A guy in that group of friends was interested in dating her. I have not met those 3 friends of her previously. I remember looking at his face as I shook his hands. I remember that his face was about a few degrees tilted to the side, and his eyes seemed to have a hidden smile inside them even though they looked normal on the outside. All of a sudden Ni pops up “This guy cannot be trusted” in my mind. There is no explanation to why and how such a conclusion was reached. Usually I do not get Ni responses when I meet new people. But this was such a compelling Ni response that I have try not to show any sense of surprise on my face. (btw , tilted head, or secret smile in the eyes are by no means a "negative" attribute by itself in my mind. There was some strange combination of them..other unknown external factors which together made my Ni react)

After debating with myself for a while about the validity of this Ni, I went ahead and warned my friend about this. I knew that if I said “I don't think you should date that guy cos I think he is bad news” it would not be received well.(even though my friend would have still probably followed my advice). However I do what I think most INTJ’s do in situations like this….I couched my message in some seemingly valid, but negative observations about him, and succeeded in making my friend believe that my negative impression of him was only based on the bad behavior of that guy. (yeah I know this sounds manipulative..but sometimes we INTJ's think the ends justify the means..especially if it involves people we care about)

She took my advice and didn’t date him.Later she told me that she learned through some other friend that this guy was a player. My Ni was not wrong after all. It is events like these which make us INTJ’s to trust our Ni even on occasions when we supposedly should not

 

[Daedalus]

In my experience, Te measures the Ni perceptions against some external context or constraints. It does not so much check for rightness as for causality and workability: will the perceived solution work in the current circumstance? How likely is the perceived prediction actually to come to pass given what is really happening in the outside world?

I agree. Your explanation is better. It does check for causality and workability, often only related to the problem at hand, with the given resources. An identical problem might have a different solution tomorrow if the resources available were more/less.

Sometimes I think INTJ's are more like Engineers as opposed to INTP's who are more akin to scientists.Scientific theory at times cannot be applied directly to real life problems...things such as tolerances, safety margins...weather...network latency....the law of diminishing returns...and other factors need to be compensated for.

Ni pulls together fragments of various memories, especially visual stimuli and combines it in such a way so that it is "harmonius" decreasing the cognitive load of the snippets so they can be experienced simultaneously

Yep
In a way Ni seems to be something that adheres to principle of the whole being bigger than the sum of its parts. Ni seems to synthesize seemingly unrelated things/stimuli/memories/ideas into something that has a connection to the problem at hand.

 

[Trunks]

i don't know how it really works, i already explain it in previous threads. all i know i can see problem from above.

 

[Daedalus]

I think all intuition anticipates sensing.

Looked at that way, Ni is the work of knowing ahead of time what can come up in the moment. This is the same as saying "Ni is a rejection of Se". Instead of deigning to experience the physical moment, one sits back to draw up some collage of what is in all moments.

Obviously this collage is haunted by what experiences you haven't had, what books you didn't read, all the things you don't know. Major efforts go into examining what you are aware of and drawing out themes and images that can be timelessly projected into the future to create foreknowledge.

As to how that happens...

Hey Kalach, I'll reply tomorrow, time for some midnight league of legends gaming with buddies

 

[Reverie]

well, some Ni doms I come across on PerC would have us believe that Ni is this mystical function that magically bestows them with knowledge or enables them to see into the future or something. Even Jung said something similar in his description, "without this type of people, there would be no prophets of Israel" or something like that, but of course that wasn't written in a glorifying tone. But I feel like my Ni is just based on the object and my database of properties surrounding it - there's really no magic or whatever related to it at all.

the only scenarios that I can think of right now in which I most use my Ni are mostly the ones involving people & interpersonal relations. Like, I have seen how things played out in the past, what triggered what chain of events or reactions, and all these are stored into this database. Then when I see something similar happening, I pull out information from the database to build a framework in which to anticipate & prepare for the outcome. Usually it involves pulling out bits and pieces of information I gathered from different events and put them together to form my projection of the event.

However, this is only a part of it because in the end I'm always going to defer to the information that I receive in real time. I'm obviously not as attached to it as Ni doms; I've seen a few instances where the INTJs in my life are pretty much running on their own impressions even when there are solid, observable, external indications to the otherwise.

bleh I dunno i'm kinda tired and it's hard to explain and I cant think of any specifics right now. hope it's not too confusing.

Would you be open to consider though that Ni from a dominant function position may be a stronger more complex experience than from tertiary?
Ni+Te also gives a different flavor to Ni+Fe which also deals with matters differently. It may have a more "prophetic" quality to it because it does not work in an empiric fashion, but deals with more nebulous type of "data" and the realm of human feelings. There is an inherent openness to that type of unworded experience which is hard to discuss. Some feel it's "mystical" in nature, most don't. One could also consider that some decidedly mystical terminology has been developed to describe certain type of experience and mechanic, that can in MBTI language be described in an at least slightly more "acceptable way" if you're looking to be more kosher in a modern scientific world. Let's say something new agey like "spirit guide" for example, i.e. something that manifests in images, words and understandings flashing in your mind at a given situation which reveal unapparent and accurate information which you seemingly should not know about a situation, thing. Sometimes in your own inner symbolic language. Sounds a bit Ni-ish in some sense, doesn't it? Not saying it necessarily is the same thing. May or may not be. I have to some degree experienced things like this and didn't think I was communing with a spirit guide. Some other person would. And from their context it would be the accurate term. So it's quite complex and I find it unenlightened at times to poke fun at some people who use this type of language. It actually is valid to say that you're guided in some respect and yes, Jung was right to comment on a "prophetic" nature, as someone coming up with correct future predictions with no apparent proof could be accurately described as "prophetic". I would personally refrain from that because it reminds people of a guy with an "End is nigh" sign parading the boulevard, or some kind of a pseudo-Jesus crank. Just my 2 cents on the matter.

 

[Kayness]

Would you be open to consider though that Ni from a dominant function position may be a stronger more complex experience than from tertiary?

I'm sorry you didn't get that implication from my post.

So it's quite complex and I find it unenlightened at times to poke fun at some people who use this type of language. It actually is valid to say that you're guided in some respect and yes, Jung was right to comment on a "prophetic" nature, as someone coming up with correct future predictions with no apparent proof could be accurately described as "prophetic". I would personally refrain from that because it reminds people of a guy with an "End is nigh" sign parading the boulevard, or some kind of a pseudo-Jesus crank. Just my 2 cents on the matter.

If I recount some personal anecdote from a non-Ni dom perspective and expressing some sort of a frustration I experience in dealing with them sometimes, it's 'poking fun'? And yes, this is exactly what I was talking about in my post - running on impressions. Impressions that I was poo-pooing Ni, and then taken that to be true without bothering to ask for clarification. thanks for proving my point.

 

[Kayness]

[MENTION=10033]Daedalus[/MENTION] - on a slightly tangental note, I'm with an ISTJ and he tells me that for most of the time, Si serves the Si doms well. I'm sure this is the same way for Ni. It's just the unchecked Pi that gives me a hard time.

Anyway, thanks that anecdote. That actually makes me wonder what a 'hunch' is, as in, how to deconstruct it so that I may analyze it, because I'm willing to accept this explanation more than the 'it's mystical, etc.' one. You say that it's from the way they interact with others and body language. Perhaps that's Se, picking up external cues and then feeding it to Ni, which in turns generates extrapolations & the motivations associated with them, then to Te, which eliminates unlikely options given the situation, then to Fi, which evaluates the rest (this is what I was trying to do, given that mindset/motivation; this is good/bad)? Then this is all very subconscious within the user, so they don't realize they're using all these functions in tandem.

 

[Reverie]

I'm sorry you didn't get that implication from my post.


If I recount some personal anecdote from a non-Ni dom perspective and expressing some sort of a frustration I experience in dealing with them sometimes, it's 'poking fun'? And yes, this is exactly what I was talking about in my post - running on impressions. Impressions that I was poo-pooing Ni, and then taken that to be true without bothering to ask for clarification. thanks for proving my point.

Well I'm sorry if you think I'm poo-pooing on your comment. It was not my intention. You're going by your first impression jumping into that conclusion and it's not correct. If I recount my experience from a Ni-dom perspective it's not necessarily meant as criticism toward you. No need to be so hostile.

 

[StephMC]

That's a really interesting perespective on Ni use. I can identify with a lot of it. I've always used my past experiences to project meanings to other things I encounter, and am usually good at forecasting traits and qualities of new items/people I encounter. I always thought the past experiences thing was an Se/Ni use, and that Ni dom use really was more "magical". But I suppose the only real difference is how the data is originally picked up. I originally pick it up with Se, then later that becomes part of the storehouse of data Ni uses. How Ni picks up data to use in the future is a little mind boggling to me.