F = personal relationships vs T = social interactions

[Jaguar]

Again, the "future" element is just one part of it.

The future element is part of it but what won't get the job done is using the woefully inadequate word "foreboding," which is a feeling something bad is about to happen.

You posted," Introverted Thinking looks to further clarify and better define things." That may be the case, but you're certainly not clarifying or better defining anything.

Ni:

Foreseeing implications, conceptualizing new ways of seeing things, and getting a sense or image of the future or of profound things.
Being strongly influenced by a vision of what will be, which may involve an abstract, even vague understanding of complexities that seem difficult to explain. Focusing on a preconceived outcome or goal. Perhaps not articulating or even being aware of premises or assumptions behind the envisioned implications. Describing implications and the final picture.

That's from one of Linda Berens and Dario Nardi's joint publications. Does that sound like foreboding to you? Hardly.

 

[Pionart]

Ni: "liberate our sense impressions from their larger context, thereby creating more options for perception itself"

This is confusing to me, because whereas Se sees just what is occurring as it's occurring, doesn't Ni interpret this in terms of the bigger picture, thus unifying perception?

Though, I guess you could say the manifestation-of-essence, world-of-forms style approach of Ni actually does liberate perception (from reality).


About foreboding, I take that term to imply the following two elements

1) That the actual occurrence suggests something below the surface, a hidden meaning to be uncovered
2) That the meaning has a primarily negative character.

2 is reasonable in that I've heard it said that all introverted functions relate to pain avoidance, in contrast to the extroverted functions which are about the pursuance of pleasure.

Comparing with Si: Si notices changes in the environment, registering that things are not as the person is used to, thus may also be said to have a negative character. (I guess that deviations from the "standard way of things" are seen as potentially dangerous, perhaps part of the reason why SJs are so prominent in areas like law and medicine).

--

Interpreting this in light of the post I've just written: what I've done here (as an Ni dominant) is to try and understand what Eric B is saying, so that the terms/definitions used become unified with the general typological worldview that I've formed, while perhaps being independent of what was actually said.

I've thus registered a deviation from the ideas which I employ in my own understanding, and attempted to remedy the situation through the initial phases of a perspective shift. (other functions are brought into play too, such as Fe social request and Ti definition optimising)

 

[Eric B]

Well, as I said, I don't completely agree with Berens/Nardi's focus on "foreseeing". Not saying it's totally inaccurate, but it's a bit narrow, and can be misleading.

One of the next links on last night's Ni Google was: Introverted iNtuiting - (Ni)

"Introverted iNtuiting involves synthesizing the seemingly paradoxical or contradictory, which takes understanding to a new level.
Using this process, we can have moments when completely new, unimagined realizations come to us.
A disengagement from interactions in the room occurs, followed by a sudden 'Aha!' or 'That's it!'" (then goes into the whole "future" thing).

That's what I was trying to convey with "forebodance", and again, notice the different form of the word. I deliberately changed it from "foreboding" (which you keep using), to show that it's not to be understood with the common meaning of "something bad is going to happen". I'm trying to get back to its original root, of being a gut feeling, like those other descriptions.

Here are all eight of Berens' "simple definitions".

Se experiencing and acting in the immediate context
Si reviewing and recalling past experiences and seeking detailed data
Ne Interpreting situations and relationships and picking up meanings and interconnections to other contexts
Ni foreseeing implications, transformations, and likely effects
Te segmenting, organizing for efficiency, and systematizing
Ti Analyzing, categorizing and evaluating according to principles
Fe Connecting and considering others and the group
Fi valuing and considering importance, beliefs and worth

These are all verb present participles, and make the functions look like actions, or "tools" that we "use", and this is what has caused more confusion over what these things actually are. So any time someone does any of those behaviors, they say "I used Xy function, so maybe that must determine my type". Again, I thought that was the type of stuff you used to always criticize, so I'm kind of shocked to see you defending it so, now.
I remember about 10 years ago, trying to understand Ni on another board, and discussing with someone whether "foreseeing" that a glass near the edge of counter will fall to the floor was Ni; based on these definitions! It has its element of truth, but is misleading after awhile. That word is too broad and overused, as is most of the others.

Ti "looks" (seeks) to bring clarity, but since it thinks "outside the box", and will often go against the logical convention (to the chagrin of Te), then it may end up not being clear to others. That's often the dilemma of NTP's. Still, there's the Ne part, which puts it out there, to raise discussion. So far, I have one objector on that one (and a sort of caution from someone else on one of the others). So if the term still has too much of a negative connotation, then I'll consider continuing to look for something better.

Since I believe the functions are perspectives, I prefer nouns (mainly "verbal nouns").
(Berens likes everything to be verbs. When I asked her about sharing the new Intentional Styles names, she told me to keep them verbs; hence "Orchestrating" [NTJ/SFP] rather than "Orchestrators". They feel nouns are what lead to "this is what you ARE", which they are trying to avoid, and for regular concrete nouns, I can see where they have a point. But when it comes to the functions, it leads to the opposite extreme of "this is what you DO", which is just as "black and white"-sounding).

 

[Eric B]

This is confusing to me, because whereas Se sees just what is occurring as it's occurring, doesn't Ni interpret this in terms of the bigger picture, thus unifying perception?

Though, I guess you could say the manifestation-of-essence, world-of-forms style approach of Ni actually does liberate perception (from reality).

Yeah; that is a bit tricky to digest at first, but the key word there (and common thread for all the perception functions) is the "sense impressions". That's what's being liberated from the big picture (larger contexts) for Ni, producing the "insights" that seem to "come out of nowhere", where Ne uses the impressions to match its big picture.

About foreboding, I take that term to imply the following two elements

1) That the actual occurrence suggests something below the surface, a hidden meaning to be uncovered
2) That the meaning has a primarily negative character.

OK. Well, I was trying to see if it could be divorced from that meaning, since it's really an added meaning anyway.

2 is reasonable in that I've heard it said that all introverted functions relate to pain avoidance, in contrast to the extroverted functions which are about the pursuance of pleasure.

Never heard of this; at least I don't think. It might kind of ring a bell for some reason, though I'm not sure. I know there's a new idea of introversion and extroversion in classic temperament (think Interaction Style) being tied to dopamine, and how much one wants out of life. So the extroverts want a lot out of life, and what is extraversion in type, but an extraverted function being in the dominant position. (And in classic temperament, the introverts are driven by fear of rejection). So maybe there' something to that.

Comparing with Si: Si notices changes in the environment, registering that things are not as the person is used to, thus may also be said to have a negative character. (I guess that deviations from the "standard way of things" are seen as potentially dangerous, perhaps part of the reason why SJs are so prominent in areas like law and medicine).

Interesting idea. SJ's are "structure focused", which is carries a sort of a "critical" bent (especially when Keirsey is translated to the classic temperaments), and NJ's (Ni preferring types), which ties into Interaction styles, are "directing", which also carries a similar, critical, 'task focus".

 

[Jaguar]

If you think Ni is simply a gut feeling, you don't understand Ni. But then that's been the case for over a decade around here. The NTPs not understanding NTJs and whining about Ni. "Waaaaaah. What is Ni?"

Same ol' same ol'.

 

[Pionart]

Yeah; that is a bit tricky to digest at first, but the key word there (and common thread for all the perception functions) is the "sense impressions". That's what's being liberated from the big picture (larger contexts) for Ni, producing the "insights" that seem to "come out of nowhere", where Ne uses the impressions to match its big picture.

Ok, I think I get it then.

OK. Well, I was trying to see if it could be divorced from that meaning, since it's really an added meaning anyway.

Never heard of this; at least I don't think. It might kind of ring a bell for some reason, though I'm not sure. I know there's a new idea of introversion and extroversion in classic temperament (think Interaction Style) being tied to dopamine, and how much one wants out of life. So the extroverts want a lot out of life, and what is extraversion in type, but an extraverted function being in the dominant position. (And in classic temperament, the introverts are driven by fear of rejection). So maybe there' something to that.

I haven't given the idea enough consideration to have legitimate insight regarding it, but it's certainly something to consider!

Interesting idea. SJ's are "structure focused", which is carries a sort of a "critical" bent (especially when Keirsey is translated to the classic temperaments), and NJ's (Ni preferring types), which ties into Interaction styles, are "directing", which also carries a similar, critical, 'task focus".

The term "structure focused" with regards to SJs sounds odd, because the common thread of SJs is Si, and Si is a perception function, and I thought "structure" implied judgement? I think structure might be extroverted judgement in particular, so would relate to all J types, though the words might be being used with a different connotation than I am thinking of.

 

[Pionart]

Examples of T being about social groups

Te-Doms are the gods and goddesses of social leadership. They're often poor at one-on-one relationships, but no one can read a crowd of people better than them and take leadership of that crowd. And they *empathize* with the group, in their own way. An ESTJ "mother hen" type of person (Te-Dom) will defend her "tribe" fiercely. Even an ENTJ male (Te-Dom) can be very "tribal" in his allegiances. So I won't even bother going further into Te's as social animals.

Meantime, INTPs (Ti-Dom) can actually be highly sensitive to group dynamics by virtue of Ti (a social function), while they are much weaker with their Fe-Inf (a personal-relationship) function. But because they're introverts, they bring their social observations inward and analyze them to death. The result: They use their Ti analysis to produce philosophical and legal and political systems that define how people should get along with each other. In other words, INTP is strong at reading groups, but they bring it inside and intellectualize it to the point that it comes out as intellectual systems for regulating group behavior. Short version: Good at groups, but with a very intellectual output on the subject.

Ahem... to give my views on the actual thread topic...

The quoted section sounds really off. When you're describing Te dominants, it sounds more like you're describing Fe dominants. (or: evidence needed)

And you're begging the question by calling Ti a "social function". Ti is typically regarded as the most socially detached function. Ti can analyse people, in a detached manner, but the social inclinations of a TP are going to come largely from the Fe (and in another sense, from the fact that humans are social creatures in a way which applies to (almost?) everyone and doesn't depend on specific functions).

--

How Te does relate to social groups...

Te is hierarchical, so when there is a hierarchical structure associated with the group, such as a military chain of command, this suggests Te. So, Te deals with people through systems rather than empathy.

 

[Jaguar]

They're often poor at one-on-one relationships, but no one can read a crowd of people better than them and take leadership of that crowd. And they *empathize* with the group, in their own way.

I don't read crowds or empathize with groups. That sounds like the behavior of an old Fe Dom pal of mine who used to post here.

 

[Eric B]

If you think Ni is simply a gut feeling, you don't understand Ni. But then that's been the case for over a decade around here. The NTPs not understanding NTJs and whining about Ni. "Waaaaaah. What is Ni?"

Same ol' same ol'.

I didn't say Ni was itself the "gut feeling"; I said that was the original meaning of "forebode", and it's obvious whatever term we apply to describe the function is not going to fit perfectly, whether meaning a gut feeling; a negative connotation, or "foreseeing" something. But "gut feeling" is often used to try to convey the way Ni awareness surfaces. I was drawing from one of the links, which said "Ni relies on gut feelings and intuition about a situation to help them understand." (Yeah, but go on and put down other types now!)

 

[Jaguar]

I didn't say Ni was itself the "gut feeling"; I said that was the original meaning of "forebode", and it's obvious whatever term we apply to describe the function is not going to fit perfectly, whether meaning a gut feeling; a negative connotation, or "foreseeing" something. But "gut feeling" is often used to try to convey the way Ni awareness surfaces. I was drawing from one of the links, which said "Ni relies on gut feelings and intuition about a situation to help them understand." (Yeah, but go on and put down other types now!)

Are you really this concerned with one-word descriptions/definitions that merely float along the surface?

 

[Pionart]

Are you really this concerned with one-word descriptions/definitions that merely float along the surface?

Are you really this concerned with concerns? I'm concerned.

 

[Jaguar]

Are you really this concerned with concerns? I'm concerned.

I'm concerned with your concern about concern.

 

[Pionart]

I'm concerned with your concern about concern.

I was being foreboding.

You see... your nitpickiness simply screams "Si", and yet you type yourself as ENTJ, correct? (I've mentioned the Si thing before)

I'm not saying I think you're an SJ, I actually think you're an INTP (although the Si is solid part of the typing) - and for an INTP to be focusing on Si so repeatedly, with such a critical tone, implies an imbalance in the psyche where a shadow function (by shadow I mean the weaker functions, not unconscious ones) is treated as the point.

I just thought I should inform you of my opinion.

 

[Jaguar]

I was being foreboding.
You see... your nitpickiness simply screams "Si"

I have an English/Literature degree and worked in advertising for years. Advertising is an interesting game in that you need to say much with little space to say it. Choose the wrong words to convey a company's message and you just shit six figures down the toilet. Words matter. Period.

I'm not saying I think you're an SJ, I actually think you're an INTP

Yet another person unwilling to learn type models and how to apply them. Neither SJ nor INTP are even possibilities.

One would have to be blind not to know my communication style is that of a Directing type versus an Informing type with 10+ years of posts to peruse. There are 8 Directing types and 8 Informing types. I just knocked out 8, including INTP and ENTP, both of which are Informing types. Not Directing types.

Pay attention, rookie. I'm only going to do this once. This is me:

1. Directing communications have a time and task orientation
2. Initiating types are more comfortable with making the first contact

In-Charge (Directing and Initiating). Typically taking quick action and focused on results, they drive the team to achieve the goal. (ESTJ, ENTJ, ENFJ, ESTP)

1. Abstract Language Thinking and talking about concepts and patterns, referencing sensory detail as needed. Implication, hypotheses, or symbolic meanings might occupy most free thought time.
2. Pragmatic roles require that individuals act in accordance with what they see needs to be done to get the desired result. They may be people or task focused. When a decision needs to be made their first inclination is to act independently.

Rational/Theorist (Abstract and Pragmatic): Want knowledge and to be competent, to achieve mastery. Seek expertise to understand how the world and things in it work. (INTP, INTJ, ENTP, ENTJ)

Put it all together and you knock out ESTJ, ENFJ, and ESTP by definition and you're left with one possibility: ENTJ.

This is a more efficient way to proceed than asking a deeply penetrating question such as: "Do you like broccoli?" to assess type or something as silly as telling someone they are picky.
Learn how to type using more objective methods.

Here's a forum thread I posted a link to earlier:

interactionstyles.com

Or grab a copy of An Introduction To Interaction Styles by Linda Berens.

Good luck.

 

[Pionart]

I [...] worked in advertising for years.

As if I needed yet another reason to have a low opinion of you?

I don't know if these type approaches that you just mentioned have any validity at all. I'll look into it, but unless I can figure out or see a proof for them, I'm going to assume it's essentially nonsense.

 

[Norexan]

I was being foreboding.

You see... your nitpickiness simply screams "Si", and yet you type yourself as ENTJ, correct? (I've mentioned the Si thing before)

I'm not saying I think you're an SJ, I actually think you're an INTP (although the Si is solid part of the typing) - and for an INTP to be focusing on Si so repeatedly, with such a critical tone, implies an imbalance in the psyche where a shadow function (by shadow I mean the weaker functions, not unconscious ones) is treated as the point.

I just thought I should inform you of my opinion.

Correct. His style of talking is so much non-directive, nor straightforward which is characteristics for Se users.
When I speak to him I always think how he talks the way he talks because he want to express his personal reasoning for things (Ti) and not to be get by people (Te)
Like when you write a poem and do some things when you want express your feelings (Fi) toward someone instead just show it and be get by people what you feel (Fe). Same thing. Different objects.
Also he gets stress and remember some things when I spoke about his ability to judge people abound him (Fe)

And the way how he is thinking "I know who I am", "This is me!" LOL. This is Introverted (READ SELF) Judging (Ti,Fi).


And btw only safe method to expose some type is not with line of stereotyping bullshit description but you inferior function.
If psychology is so simple then MBTI will work for all people but it doesn' t work because human brain is not so simplistic as they want to present.
For example the way they describe ENTJ or some type this is what in psychology is calling be a psychopath.
Or another way the way that Jung describe dom Te I don't see any illness in his description.

OK I am really slow to get my feelings and other people feelings or how my action has the impact to other people's feelings are even worst but I cannot classify myself as psychopath simple because I AM NOT AWARE OF SOMEONE'S SUFFERING.
Therefore I am innocent.

 

[Jaguar]

As if I needed yet another reason to have a low opinion of you?

I don't know if these type approaches that you just mentioned have any validity at all. I'll look into it, but unless I can figure out or see a proof for them, I'm going to assume it's essentially nonsense.

Looks like your fweelings got hurt. Too bad. You can always resort to making posts about someone being ISFP because they listen to Van Halen. Fabulous type model.

 

[Tater]

Put it all together and you knock out ESTJ, ENFJ, and ESTP by definition and you're left with one possibility: ENTJ.

This is a more efficient way to proceed than asking a deeply penetrating question such as: "Do you like broccoli?" to assess type or something as silly as telling someone they are picky.

Deductive reasoning. Typical of Te in action.

 

[Pionart]

Looks like your fweelings got hurt. Too bad. You can always resort to making posts about someone being ISFP because they listen to Van Halen. Fabulous type model.

What, no they didn't? I'm not sure where that comment or the Van Halen thing have come from.

 

[Pionart]

Here's a forum thread I posted a link to earlier:

interactionstyles.com

Yeah sorry but those groupings are way too odd. Given that "ESTJ, ENTJ, ENFJ, ESTP" and the other groupings lack symmetry, I'm going to assume that they're based on some kind of approximation at best, and hence are invalid for making a specific determination of type. With claims as peculiar as non-symmetric groups, I'm going to put the burden of proof on the people promoting such an idea before I even try to concoct some post-hoc rationalisation for why it might be reasonable.