Ne and Ni

[Poki]

People are objects. Just a particularly interesting type of object, that's all

People can play with each other, objects just respond

 

[jenocyde]

So if your not in MBTI to understand interactions then what are you here to understand? Life is nothing more then interactions. Objects interacting with objects and people interacting with people. There are no objects here, just people.

I was referring to not being interested in what you are interested in, namely Se with Ni and Ti. I get the feeling that you made up some theory that applies only to that and are asking me to disprove it. Not interested.

And people are objects, at least as far as I'm concerned.

EDIT: OMT beat me to it. Bravo, dear sir.

 

[Poki]

I was referring to not being interested in what you are interested in, namely Se with Ni and Ti. I get the feeling that you made up some theory that applies only to that and are asking me to disprove it. Not interested.

And people are objects, at least as far as I'm concerned.

EDIT: OMT beat me to it. Bravo, dear sir.

I know thats how you felt because you answered like I asked you to do something. That is the interactions I look for.

edit: sorry I dont look for these, this is what I pick up on naturally, this is what I deem as Se as it is my external perception in regards to what I see or "take note of". To clairfy the looking is that I had to actually go back and reread my post because I dont remember it coming out as a question.

 

[Thalassa]

I do Ne but no where near as wonderfully as the entp/enfps I've seen on here. Ne appears genius to me. of course S is just one hot function! but that's for another thread..........

That's weird, because Ni seems genius to me.

 

[Space_Oddity]

That's weird, because Ni seems genius to me.

Lol, I had the same reaction

 

[bobby]

the four elements theory is to physics as mbti is to psychology methinks

 

[Eric B]

As such, there really isn't any extraverted or introverted perceiving. It all has to do with what your judging function handles the perceptive data. If you have introverted judging, then the perceiving function appears "extraverted", because the internal judging function needs a constant flow of external data to keep from starving itself. When starved of this data, the judging function will attempt to compensate by using whatever sensory data is within, that is, previously processed by the judging data. For example:

Ne dom/aux: the "Si" tert/inf is the internal recollection of the initial N/Ji processing, brought together once again through the Ji function. Bigger assembled chunks of data are tied together through Fi/Ti, and this leads to much less effective results, since the sets of data are too broad to connect as well as the smaller ones brought in through Ne.

Se dom/aux: the "Ni" tert/inf is the internal dissection of the initial S/Ji processing, divided into its various parts through the Ji function. Since the big sets of sensory data are too large and unwieldy to handle for more than a short period of time by the Ji function (the "gut instinct" aspect), it then focuses in on smaller portions of the set, trying to come to either Fi or Ti-based conclusions about them ("If Coach would have put me in in '83, everything would have been different"). The problem is that the only dissembled data is within that one sphere, and that these conclusions do not factor in other, more distantly related variables.

If you have extraverted judging, then your perceptive function will appear introverted. This is simply because the external judging function needs an internal basis from which to operate. "Si" just bases this on big sets of data, and "Ni" bases this on small sets of data. When dealing with incompatible data, the Je will have no internal basis for comparison, and will thus have to compensate externally. So:

Si dom/aux: More than anything, Si immediately allows for Je to notice inconsistency, because it holds those big chunks of data (combined auditory, visual, gustatory, olfactory, tactile and emotional sensations) and lets Je compare them holistically to one another, and thus understanding immediately what's different between the two sets. If a situation is entirely unprecedented, and there is no means of comparison, the Je will do whatever it can to bring that situation back to something it can work with internally, also known as tert/inf "Ne".

Ni dom/aux: Ni splits data up. It keeps splitting them up until Je starts putting them back together. When Je puts them back together, unusual and previously unnoticed patterns develop, which seem de novo since they are externally consistent (either on Te or Fe terms), but there was no means of knowing this before the data was broken apart and reassembled subconsciously. When the data is understood too discretely to further analyze, Je will then act on the outside world in an attempt to come up with more information that can be further processed, that is, tert/inf "Se".

Interesting, as this is the opposite of what this site Fundamental Nature of the MBTI says; where it's the perception attitude that sets the "matrix area" (i=local; e=wide) the judging function works in. since perception hypothetically would come first in the process, that would seem to make sense.

 

[Serendipity]

Prob. OOT.

OOT!

People can play with each other, objects just respond

just respond. . .
So what you are doing is something other than responding on your interpretation of what is written here?
I see.

I'd love to eat your soul.


(on second note: There might be a joke in this that I don't get. I'm thinking sex-related? Or are you referring to.. "life" and life? Where as "life" equals ... more softness? Or do you perhaps think that objects (that aren't animals and/or plants) use some sort of communication style unknown to man? I could totally be in on that idea, 'cause thinking about it: It could be made sense if what I note might actually just be a packet that is sent through a server, trying to distinguish us. Um. I went ahead of myself somewhere. . .

What I mean is that it could all just be a certain sense of belief. That got me wondering about philosophy, is it just a plan made up to explain our actions? Kinda counter-productive. Kinda nice too though.

Anyway, was there a joke or not?)

 

[onemoretime]

Interesting, as this is the opposite of what this site Fundamental Nature of the MBTI says; where it's the perception attitude that sets the "matrix area" (i=local; e=wide) the judging function works in. since perception hypothetically would come first in the process, that would seem to make sense.

Well, I'm right and they're wrong.

Also, lots of intuitor bias in that one. How could someone with Ti or Te be not "sensitive to process" simply because they're a sensor? Ti and Te are both about nothing but process.

 

[evilrobot]

Ne thinks outside the box.

Ni thinks outside reality.

 

[VagrantFarce]

Giving it another go:

Extraverted Intuition makes you aware of the wider context of whatever is being perceived, allowing you to create interesting responses and alter meaning on-the-fly. From this standpoint, context is inferred from what can be observed and otherwise outwardly perceived, like following a link labelled "relevant websites".

[youtube=1ioBZ5fNJO8]Ne[/youtube]

Introverted Intuition makes you aware of all the potential frameworks that could be applied to a situation, changing the meaning by simply approaching things in a different way. You're not "looking" for a wider context in the observable world, you're shifting perspective. From this standpoint, context is inferred from the assumptions we bring into the world, like changing the lens on a camera.

[youtube=FO214IFRW1M]Ni[/youtube]

 

[tcda]

VF, great contributions in this thread, cleared up a lot for me. The above videos showed it pretty well I thought.

I have to say the cescritpion in the OP just sounds like what I always thought Ti is:

"Why did that person spit to the side as he walked past me? Does he know me? Did he do it without thinking? Perhaps he spat just because he had something in his mouth and coincidentally I was there when he spat. But then again perhaps not. He could have also done it because he doesn't like the way I look, or dress, or my posture. Hmmm.. Maybe it's a sign. Maybe he's telling me something without being direct. He's wearing a similar scarf therefore he probably despised the idea of me wearing one too. Maybe he wants to see my reaction. He's not looking back so perhaps he expects me to go to him and ask him why he did that. Perhaps there is a person with a camera nearby video taping this. Maybe he is good though. Maybe he is indicating he is sick and wants me to stay away from him. Too noble. He's definitely up to something... "

Regarding Ni not being led by observation, I would agree with your other approach better, where you said to compare the percieving fucntions to their Sensing counterparts, in order to better understand them. I am not expert on MBTI but when people say that Ni just "comes out of the mind" (as someone basically said I can't remember who), then it begs the question: where do the thoughts in the mind come from? The human mind is a material entity which can consciosuly percieve, analyze and operate on the world around it, playing on possibilities inherent in reality and imagining parallel realities based on that, but not something that can create its own concepts irrespective of the external material world. Matter can exist without consciousness but no consciousness exists without matter.

So I like the Se-Ni and Si-Ne approach. Or alternatively, comapring Se to Ne and Si to Ni. If we look at this, then we can see that Se leads to responding to the concrete reality around you and "sensing" opportunities, truths, dangers, and just the sensations, of the moment as they come up, whereas Ne lives in the realm of ideas around it, and "intuits" the opportunities, truths, dangers and meaning of them as they come up.

Likewise Si stores past concrete experiences and then checks reality against them, assimilating or rejecting them based on this whereas Ni stores past understandings of ideas and then synthesizes or rejects new concepts on this basis, which is obviously not a static, but a very dynamic process, i.e. you have a synthesis of ideas in your mind forming a whole, and then each new theory is either synhtesized into this, improving the whole or rejected.

Or was that just bullshit? I have to say, it's the only way I can make sense of Ni especially and function theory in general.

Likewise, I feel we need to use the concept of "shadow functions" more, because otherwise the model I proposed above doesn't work, but I think I'll make another thread about that.:s

 

[Stained]

Ne is the second most effective function, next to Ti. Think about it, INTPs and ENTPs are the most intelligent types for the reason of their fluid knowledge and abilities to think far far far outside the box.

Some may argue that INTJs and ENTJs are the most intelligent, but history begs to differ. ENTPs and INTPs have always proved themselves to be the greatest in the field of science, entertainment, or whatever they put their mind to. The preference and ability to come up with other ideas as a constant is a great trait.

The 5 best types, based on what area of expertise affects the world best (if you have a viable argument, please, tell), INTP (Smartest), INFP (Most creative), INTJ (Most analytical), ENTJ (Most pragmatic), ENTP (Most innovative). Seconded by: ENFP (Most 'talented' or 'inspiring'), INFJ (Most compassionate).

Anyways, to the point. Ne and Ni are useful in different ways entirely, but in my supported opinion (as the 4/5 types listed above have Ne), Ne has proven most useful.

 

[Tamske]

To me, Ne and Ni are connected. Very strongly.

Ne seems to be a little bit more introverted than Se. It starts from something it observes but associates and associates and after the third or fourth step, the things you are dreaming/thinking have nothing to do any more with what you observe. Has it then turned into Ni?

I've always had this impression that Ni is somehow more structured than Ne, probably because Ni is the main perceiving function of the NJs, which are methodical Judgers. I don't know if this is right or if it is the extraverted judging function rather than the introverted perceiving function which makes the Judgers methodical.

These are the images I get whenever I think of Ne and Ni:

Ne is the randomly, madly associating brainstormer; it draws your attention to new ideas and concepts; it jumps about from one idea to the other whenever triggered by an observation.

Ni is the one which groups your experiences into concepts; it can retrieve "how to make hot water" from your memory when asked how to make hot chocolate; it is responsible for the transfer of knowledge to other domains.

 

[Tamske]

Ne is the second most effective function, next to Ti. Think about it, INTPs and ENTPs are the most intelligent types for the reason of their fluid knowledge and abilities to think far far far outside the box.

Some may argue that INTJs and ENTJs are the most intelligent, but history begs to differ. ENTPs and INTPs have always proved themselves to be the greatest in the field of science, entertainment, or whatever they put their mind to. The preference and ability to come up with other ideas as a constant is a great trait.

The 5 best types, based on what area of expertise affects the world best (if you have a viable argument, please, tell), INTP (Smartest), INFP (Most creative), INTJ (Most analytical), ENTJ (Most pragmatic), ENTP (Most innovative). Seconded by: ENFP (Most 'talented' or 'inspiring'), INFJ (Most compassionate).

Anyways, to the point. Ne and Ni are useful in different ways entirely, but in my supported opinion (as the 4/5 types listed above have Ne), Ne has proven most useful.

I beg to differ.
I think Ne is responsible for greatness as well as nonsense. It's a bit like the monkeys at the typewriter.
You need a lot of ENTPs and ENFPs messing around and then one will eventually hit greatness.
Other types will probably be more mediocre... but you need mediocrity. It's safer. I am sure there are a lot of failed geniuses among the Ne users.
Which of the functions is the most useful depends on what you need.

As a Ne user, I'm messing around a lot trying to hit the greatness. Luckily, I've got a lot of help (in the guise of an External Te) to keep a steady job in the meantime.

 

[simulatedworld]

Ne is the second most effective function, next to Ti. Think about it, INTPs and ENTPs are the most intelligent types for the reason of their fluid knowledge and abilities to think far far far outside the box.

Some may argue that INTJs and ENTJs are the most intelligent, but history begs to differ. ENTPs and INTPs have always proved themselves to be the greatest in the field of science, entertainment, or whatever they put their mind to. The preference and ability to come up with other ideas as a constant is a great trait.

The 5 best types, based on what area of expertise affects the world best (if you have a viable argument, please, tell), INTP (Smartest), INFP (Most creative), INTJ (Most analytical), ENTJ (Most pragmatic), ENTP (Most innovative). Seconded by: ENFP (Most 'talented' or 'inspiring'), INFJ (Most compassionate).

Anyways, to the point. Ne and Ni are useful in different ways entirely, but in my supported opinion (as the 4/5 types listed above have Ne), Ne has proven most useful.

How ridiculously Ne-biased!

1) There are multiple forms of intelligence; NPs are not the "smartest types" unless you're judging intelligence from a limited Ne perspective.

2) All of your assertions that these skills are the "best" are purely subjective and based on (you guessed it) bias toward Ne.

3) You probably auto-type every talented/influential person you admire as an N because you have a grossly slanted negative view of S types.

 

[Moiety]

Ne is the second most effective function, next to Ti. Think about it, INTPs and ENTPs are the most intelligent types for the reason of their fluid knowledge and abilities to think far far far outside the box.

Some may argue that INTJs and ENTJs are the most intelligent, but history begs to differ. ENTPs and INTPs have always proved themselves to be the greatest in the field of science, entertainment, or whatever they put their mind to. The preference and ability to come up with other ideas as a constant is a great trait.

The 5 best types, based on what area of expertise affects the world best (if you have a viable argument, please, tell), INTP (Smartest), INFP (Most creative), INTJ (Most analytical), ENTJ (Most pragmatic), ENTP (Most innovative). Seconded by: ENFP (Most 'talented' or 'inspiring'), INFJ (Most compassionate).

Anyways, to the point. Ne and Ni are useful in different ways entirely, but in my supported opinion (as the 4/5 types listed above have Ne), Ne has proven most useful.

Talented?? I resent that comment.

 

[Aerithria]

Ne is the second most effective function, next to Ti. Think about it, INTPs and ENTPs are the most intelligent types for the reason of their fluid knowledge and abilities to think far far far outside the box.

Some may argue that INTJs and ENTJs are the most intelligent, but history begs to differ. ENTPs and INTPs have always proved themselves to be the greatest in the field of science, entertainment, or whatever they put their mind to. The preference and ability to come up with other ideas as a constant is a great trait.

The 5 best types, based on what area of expertise affects the world best (if you have a viable argument, please, tell), INTP (Smartest), INFP (Most creative), INTJ (Most analytical), ENTJ (Most pragmatic), ENTP (Most innovative). Seconded by: ENFP (Most 'talented' or 'inspiring'), INFJ (Most compassionate).

Anyways, to the point. Ne and Ni are useful in different ways entirely, but in my supported opinion (as the 4/5 types listed above have Ne), Ne has proven most useful.

No, they just make the most noise about it.

 

[theadoor]

No, they just make the most noise about it.

True

 

[AphroditeGoneAwry]

To me, Ne and Ni are connected. Very strongly.

Ne seems to be a little bit more introverted than Se. It starts from something it observes but associates and associates and after the third or fourth step, the things you are dreaming/thinking have nothing to do any more with what you observe. Has it then turned into Ni?

I've always had this impression that Ni is somehow more structured than Ne, probably because Ni is the main perceiving function of the NJs, which are methodical Judgers. I don't know if this is right or if it is the extraverted judging function rather than the introverted perceiving function which makes the Judgers methodical.

These are the images I get whenever I think of Ne and Ni:

Ne is the randomly, madly associating brainstormer; it draws your attention to new ideas and concepts; it jumps about from one idea to the other whenever triggered by an observation.

Ni is the one which groups your experiences into concepts; it can retrieve "how to make hot water" from your memory when asked how to make hot chocolate; it is responsible for the transfer of knowledge to other domains.

I really like what you have to say regarding the functions. But I think the bolded is more Si, the function associated with memory and how it feels to repeat things, isn't it? Ni to me would say: Is this a good time for hot chocolate? Is hot chocolate the best thing I could drink right now? And contemplate what the South American cocoa farmers had to do to deliver me my hot cocoa while I sipped it..........