*judges you all... maintains edge*
Ni, specifically, is supposed to be able to find the connection that others can't. It's supposed to be that Ni creates knowledge as opposed to discovering it from outside. The distinction is slim, and is a perceived difference based on Ni being introverted--it perceives itself to be independent of the outside world. An Ni user will understand himself to be manipulating or synthesizing connections, finding what wasn't there before.
I don't see how it could be called a
true connection, if it wasn't
already there.
And, if the connection was already there, it would rightly be called a discovery, not an invention.
It would seem that, if the connection isn't
really there, then it would be a
false connection...
The obvious caveat is in the creative realm, but, even then, that only makes sense regarding the actual creative process, not the critique or analysis of art.
If a critic pointed out an aspect or quality of a film, and you yourself had not seen that aspect or quality in the film beforehand, but, after hearing it, you can either immediately, or upon going back and rewatching the film, see that the aspect or quality is
indeed in the film and is as clear as day, well, it would seem the aspect or quality had been there in the film all along, but you just hadn't seen it...
(A common refrain is that, if the director didn't intend to create that particular aspect or quality, then it doesn't "really" exist in the film; however, as I was told would happen back in college by one of my favorite professors, as I've gotten older and grown more comfortable with analyses of art, I have let go of the need for the creator's intention to necessarily be the end-all, be-all of what's true about a piece [aka,
The Death of the Author].)
Even the creative process, though, comes under some suspicion when you poke at it. What sculptor was it who said something along the lines of, "The way I make my sculptures is that I see the finished piece within the marble, and then I chip away everything else." I mean, is that, when you really get down nitty gritty and analytical-like, truly invention, or is it discovery?
Ask yourself, do you ever feel that sometimes, when you are writing a post, you are actually trying to execute the exact post that you already knew you wanted to write. In some sense, that ideal post "existed" in the future/your mind and you did not really invent it (consciously at least), so much as express what was already in (some mode of) existence.
Some people will call this kind of talk claptrap, but I truly do believe it.
Been playing around with the idea long enough to see manifestations of it many times.
Kinda like seeing that previously unrecognized aspect or quality in a movie -- you might not have considered it before, but it's still out there...
Introverted functions are cut off, deliberately, from external checks. There is some reality checking involved, but too much of that kind of nonsense, ironically, leads one astray--we map too closely to the real world and don't see the rest of what's there to see.
I like to fact check to see if what I'm coming up with is indeed in accordance with reality. It's like I start with a bunch of raw data and connections I have accumulated over the years, new data comes in and/or I try to create new connections with the data and connections I already have, and *bam* new connections are made.
Then, to verify whether the connections I have come up with are really out there or not (i.e., are true), I'll constantly be on the lookout (whether consciously or unconsciously) for data that either contradicts or confirms my speculative connections. If the new data doesn't reconcile, then the connections must be reconsidered, the flaws must be figured out, and new connections must be made. The ex post facto fact-checking then proceeds again. Rinse and repeat.
The more a particular connection is able to repeatedly and reliably pass the fact-check, the
truer it is deemed to be...
So, anyway, I guess what I'm trying to say is: why would I want to make connections that aren't really out there already (apart from creative reasons, which I've second-guessed anyway)? And, if I make these connections with the desire for them to be true, then why wouldn't I go back and fact-check them to verify whether they really
are true?