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 "forebod
ing" (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).