I know what Ni is now!

[Werebudgie]

You clearly misunderstood my intentions or something or you wouldn't have got so offended. I was honestly curious as to how you see these things, that is, why you think it's just a cultural thing etc etc.

I'm not offended, seriously, just really bored by where you wanted to take it. Sometimes stuff just bores me - just like on the other side, sometimes stuff truly fascinates me. (If it helps any, I've even been occasionally known to stop mid-sentence during a conversation and say, "Okay, now I'm just boring myself.")

My intention with that suggestion was helpful; suggesting a way that will help you get your Ni perceptions more easily accepted by others.

But that isn't my goal. I can see why you'd think it was, given what I described - but my actual goal is for me to trust my own perception more, not try to convince others. My favorite thing about this thread is the increased clarity I've gotten from the dialogue with another Ni-dom about Ni perception.

You didn't talk about what Ni-Se integration meant to you, in my interpretation what I suggested would exactly be that, integrating Se with Ni.

Well, that is in fact a great thing for me to do, and something I have been doing. But not to convince others of anything.

Also my suggestion comes from my own experience, I can sometimes have hunches but I do always try to clarify them with data first before relying on them. So, I assume it's helpful when explaining it to others as well.

In my case, I've wasted a great deal of energy in my life doing the external data route despite evidence over and over that my organic perception was accurate to start with. It has been routine practice for me to put off relying on Ni and Ni-se information until I take that long route and use all that energy. It's the long way around and is not the best way for me to move at this stage in my life. I've paid my dues after decades of taking the long way around, and at this point am moving away from that and toward a deeper instinctive trust in my actual perception. That's just me. If others do it some other way, that's them.

Well it's not my problem if your head now hurts because you decided to get angry and self-destructive instead of first attempting to clarify what I really meant.

Yeah, this is the problem with me and emoticons. What I meant in using that head-bang-wall one is that it seemed to me that if I continued to engage with you in the terms you were setting out, it would be, for me, like banging my head against a wall. And I didn't/don't want to do that. I really shouldn't use emoticons to try to communicate (except for the one with the pink handcuffs ... because really, that one is so completely self-explanatory that no one could possibly misinterpret it in any way).

Apologies all around for all the tangents I'm getting into here. Except of course the pink handcuffs part - as I see it, pink handcuffs are never truly a tangent in any discussion.

 

[badger055]

Thanks for the description. So can you sum it up as to how do you differentiate between Ni and Ti? This does seem like they are really intertwined for you.

I would describe Ni more like a feeling or a teleportation thought. It's just suddenly there like I see something that suddenly triggers an Ni spark of insight. It's more reactionary. Ti is just my default err I kind of find it hard to describe it. I guess Ti is just more linear and factual and concrete like someone reading a book out loud.

ENTJ Ni is more sophisticated. They can absorb information subconsciously without really needing to do anything.

 

[Werebudgie]

I don't remember the exact sources I got it from, but it is ingrained in my mind in such a way that it has to be external information.

The connection is that Precision is precisely (lol) how deductive logic functions. It starts out with a general principle, applies it, and gets a specific conclusion. Ti does near the same thing, it starts out with general information and gets a specific conclusion.

FWIW, deep concern with precision in areas such as word usage can also play a role in the detailed intensive work of inductive logic processes. For example, developing truly useful and data-grounded categories from raw complex qualitative data requires a real and sustained concern with getting as much precision as possible in the development and description of categories - precision helps with clarity (the precision doesn't necessarily have to be in the in-process category names, but rather in the ways those categories are described and understood in the analysis). I say this from my experience with formal academic and other professional inductive processes such as developing grounded theory using carefully documented qualitative data coding, category development etc etc. While my real (and mostly hidden to others) internal process is likely Ni-shaped, the painstaking data-detailed formally inductive data coding and analysis processes I've had to go through in the professional and academic worlds seem associated with Ti-tert in me. Exhausting for me, but formally and demonstrably inductive. And Ni "psuedo-inductive" just doesn't cut it in those formal environments.

 

[yeghor]

(I have been reduced to using emoticons instead of words. What has become of me?)

You've got tired?

I would describe Ni more like a feeling or a teleportation thought. It's just suddenly there like I see something that suddenly triggers an Ni spark of insight. It's more reactionary. Ti is just my default err I kind of find it hard to describe it. I guess Ti is just more linear and factual and concrete like someone reading a book out loud.

ENTJ Ni is more sophisticated. They can absorb information subconsciously without really needing to do anything.

This feels like self-promotion but:

I think Ti, even though tertiary, does for me what you described as Te does for you...Ni-dom jumps to a conclusion which feels right (or wrong) but doesn't readily know why...I need to think on it really hard and gather some external data (from the net) so as to bring the Ni conclusion to the forefront (making it visible to the conscious self as well as communicable to the external world)...This is a delayed process...(perhaps relatively faster for you, which may make you more articulate about it)

This came up in a dialogue with a friend...Ni conclusions feels like this to me...I am at point A (the question/problem) initially and Ni makes a (relatively quick) conclusion and jumps to point B (conclusion) which feels right...But I do not know why B feels right at that moment so cannot explain either to myself or others why it feels right...So Ti starts backtracking the solution route all the way to A, after which I can tell myself and others why it feels right (or wrong)...So Ni acts like teleporting all the way from A to B whereas Ti acts like going that path on foot back from B to A...

I've always imagined it was Ti-tert responsible for this delayed process (to flesh out, backtrack the route)...And I've associated it with cause and effect style reasoning...And I really need to force myself to bring my conclusion from the depths of Ni domain, perhaps that's why it may be consuming more energy...?

My assumption is that Ni in Ni-doms is perceiving/collecting/recording/recalling patterns (i.e. the basic essence/barebone/framework of a given set of recurring occurances) from the external world either thru Fe (INFJ) or Te (INTJ)...So INFJs' Ni is more attuned to the external data layer related with Fe and INTJs' with Te...These patterns accumulate over time to something like an internal framework or a wireframe 3D model/prototype of the external world (sometimes we Ni-doms may refer to as an internal landscape), and Ni-doms I believe sub-consciously use that model to evaluate any further incoming information whether it fits with the internal model, what kind of an effect an external occurance may have on the internal model, how the internal model may be optimized and applied to the external world etc...

This process is a sub-conscious one...Ni-dom applies an input (a question, any issue etc...) to the internal model and the model processes it and gives a result...The process inside the model (cause and effect analysis) is not immediately visible to the Ni-dom...It becomes more consciously perceived by the Ni-dom when Ni-dom applies T function to it I guess...That is Ti-tertiary in INFJs and Te-auxiliary in INTJs...

Perhaps T function regardless of external or internal direction may be apt at both inductive and deductive logic, both of which are encompassed by causal reasoning (I keep miswriting this as casual)? The direction may be signifying to what the function is applied perhaps? Ti cross checks reasoning against the internal(ized) framework/model of (which is dependent on) the person and Te cross checks reasoning against the external framework (which is observable outside [independent] of the person)...

So is Ti processes thru (or on) personal filter/perception (subjective) whereas Te processes impersonally (objective)...Does this definition fit the belowgiven?

...God, this concept has done the rounds so much I have no idea where it originally came from. Sorry.

To expand:
Te: Objectively assesses objective criteria
Ti: Subjectively assesses objective criteria
Fe: Objectively assesses subjective criteria
Fi: Subjectively assesses subjective criteria

So the first part is the method (based on whether the Judging function is introverted or extroverted - ie. Ji vs Je) and the second part is the data source that is focussed on (based on whether it is F or T). Fe for example, uses an external system (ie. what works for the collective) to analyse subjective information (ie. non-impersonal data).

Or in different wording:

Te: Assesses measureable/quantifiable/quantitative/tangible data thru impersonal filter (a filter which is more concerned with what "is" correct)
Ti: Assesses measureable/quantifiable/quantitative/tangible data thru personel filter (a filter which is more concerned with what "feels" correct)
Fe: Assesses non-quantifiable/qualitative/intangible data thru impersonal filter
Fi: Assesses non-quantifiable/qualitative/intangible data thru personal filter

--------

About deductive and inductive thing...

Ni-dom seems to use the internal framework/model/database built on collected patterns to recognize external issues/instances...The internal pattern may be used to extrapolate (fill in the gaps of) a currently unavailable part of the said external issue, which may look like going from incomplete data to a complete model...from the specific to the general...? So this looks like inductive reasoning...?

"Inductive reasoning is the opposite of deductive reasoning. Inductive reasoning makes broad generalizations from specific observations."

The said internal Ni-dom model may also be used to identify/guess/interpolate a specific part/component of the external model when a matching pattern is identified within the internal model...which may look like deductive reasoning?

"Deductive reasoning is a basic form of valid reasoning. Deductive reasoning, or deduction, starts out with a general statement, or hypothesis, and examines the possibilities to reach a specific, logical conclusion."

However, I guess Ni-dom doesn't have anything to do with reasoning itself...it just perceives and allows the Ni-dom person to perceive itself (the model)...It doesn't reason...The reasoning part I guess requires the use of T function to be able to see the gears and levers inside the internal Ni-framework...It requires T function for Ni-doms to be able to go from node to node and follow a trail within the internal (wireframe?) model...

So Ti/Te can use both inductive and deductive reasoning and aren't inherently either...? So T generally deals with overall reasoning?

Eta: Ni-dom is a built-in algorithm the components of which are not visible to the conscious self, and T is like googles that enable the conscious self of the Ni-dom person to see/trail within the algorithm?

Eta 2: Ni-dom framework also reminds of a skeleton key somehow...?

 

[INTP]

OK, but it would have been a better example if contrasting Ti and Te on the same subject material.

Subject was the car and two people related to the subject in different ways that go hand in hand with Ti and Te relate to same subject in general. And yes its possible for an Te user to be a car mechanic, but i didnt write any more for my example than i did, so take it as it is and not try to see some hidden possibilities in some potential real life people. Those people in my example arent real, they only exist within the borders of what i wrote

 

[greenfairy]

Its seeing the whole picture at all times. Both sides of the same coin. When someone says they are "Strong Willed" that also implies that they are "Stubbornly narrow sighted." If someone says they are "very shy" it also means they are "good at keeping secrets." If someone says they are a psychopath, another may argue they are "willing to do what others are not."

For every bad there is somehow a good. A yin and a yang.

And when you use Ni, you see all of existence in your mind. Civilizations flowing, coming and going, mountains forming and crumbling, cultures forming and spreading... and in the end the Ni dom (INTJ INFJ) is left feeling small, wondering how its possible to do anything good in such a huge world. (many INFJ's type as enneagram 4 scared of being insignificant, and many INTJs type as 3 or 5, scared of being worthless or inadequate.)

When I use my Ni I see everyone around me as equal to me, but I also see myself as having some kind of a gift. The ISTJ who acts like a badass and tells everyone how tough she is, does so because she feels no one respects her. So I will give her this respect and as a result she will give me something in return, perhaps she will get along with me or protect me or help me in the future. The ENTJ asks a lot of questions and constantly seeks knowledge, may secretly feel stupid because he doesn't actually understand himself, and believes understanding the world will bring about understanding of himself.

With this seeing 2 sides of every coin, Ni doms also tend to be indecisive, as all "truths" are equivalent. Their indecision comes in many forms, either in the moment decision making (INFJ), Being able to decide if one is good or evil (ENFJ's are too ethically objective with Fe dominance), being unable to choose one morality over the other (ENTJ's are too objective with Te dominance), and being unable to take action due to fear of equal and opposite forces of the universe (INTJ). Many Ni users (or intuitives for that matter) may feel depressed because... What's the point?

Thoughts?

I agree with this! Especially the bolded. Seeing all of existence together makes me happy though; it makes me thinik everything is in harmony and balance no matter what happens, and I don't have to do anything. Every outcome is equally good because everything just goes in cycles, and int he human world it leads to greater consciousness. So I don't wonder about not trying, but I do sometimes get a little depressed that the Earth is polluted and that's the world I will be bringing my future kids into. Also good insights about NJ's.

It does take me some time to process. There are two interconnected reasons for this.

First, Ni perception often emerges in ways initially inaccessible to the conscious mind, including visual images, metaphors, visceral gut feeling, stuff like that. So the information is there, but my conscious mind often doesn't comprehend what it is and thus how it could affect my movement. Second, Ni layers of reality are invisible in the cultural system in which I live, so I have learned to second-guess my own Ni perceptions as a default.

(on reflection: of course, if you're a judging-dom ... I suppose at a completely rudimentary level, a perceiving-dom might appear to deviate from the judging-dom mode by accepting all truths as equivalent. But IMO that kind of description would use a judging-dom framework to describe a perceiving-dom perception and thus would be skewed away from the actual lived experience of a perceiving-dom.)

I agree with this too.

I often get the impression that Ne-doms are always seeing 'the light', while SeNi users almost seem like they're being held back by their own neuroses and obsessions, especially if they're in some sort of Ni-Ji/Ji-Ni loop.

I was going to go "yes!" to the first part of that; Ne is yang and Ni is yin, like the nighttime. Ni sees the part of the sphere of reality which is in shadow, like the new moon.

What do you mean here? You mean ENPs are always coming to multiple realizations about whatever they're thinking about, and SPs and NJs are trying to bring everything they're seeing into one big collective image/idea?

I do anyway.

I think that the Ni subjectivity within a larger landscape may sensitize our perception to the importance of specific location in affecting perception (did that make sense at all outside my head? It's clear to me but an odd sentence).

It makes sense to me.


Edit: left off reading the thread at page 7, so I may have more comments

 

[meowington]

Ni does look at the big picture and tries to see behind the immediate reality, but that big picture isnt the whole picture as it has been abstracted, its just a guess based on what the unconscious biases see as being relevant.

I agree with this except for deciding on what you called "unconscious biases". I'm pretty sure my type for instance has very little unconscious biases, generally being one of the most self-conscious types of all. The biases we have are mostly known to our own conscious mind.

 

[badger055]

This feels like self-promotion but:

How is this self promotion like I care what you guys think of me. If you have a problem with me then just say it.

 

[yeghor]

How is this self promotion like I care what you guys think of me. If you have a problem with me then just say it.

I was referring to myself, you bastard

Here's a complimentary motorcycle for you...

 

[badger055]

I was referring to myself, you bastard

Here's a complimentary motorcycle for you...

no can do my Ni says motorcycles are dangerous

 

[valaki]

I don't remember the exact sources I got it from, but it is ingrained in my mind in such a way that it has to be external information.

I would be wary of relying on such reasoning..... plus, assuming it's external information, what source was it from?

The connection is that Precision is precisely (lol) how deductive logic functions. It starts out with a general principle, applies it, and gets a specific conclusion. Ti does near the same thing, it starts out with general information and gets a specific conclusion.

Well there was a post below that explains how precision does not have anything to do with deductive logic. That saved me the work of explaining it

And actually, if you read the links you yourself gave me, none of them talks about Ti starting out with general information.

I'm not offended, seriously, just really bored by where you wanted to take it. Sometimes stuff just bores me - just like on the other side, sometimes stuff truly fascinates me. (If it helps any, I've even been occasionally known to stop mid-sentence during a conversation and say, "Okay, now I'm just boring myself.")

No, I call bullshit on this. Based on your wording of the previous post, you were more than just "bored". You were being extremely condescending. Assuming and clearly saying out loud that faults must lie with me in everything about the discussion. Assuming and stating all sorts of BS about me. You didn't even consider that maybe you misunderstood me. You didn't ever realize that I was honestly curious about your thoughts on those matters. You also have no idea about my thoughts in general but instead of inquiring, you just made up all that crap.

And I'm really not happy that because of all that you decided not to talk about your own thoughts and instead just started BS'ing around like that. You also pigeonholed me by assuming that it would be like banging your head into the wall if you continued talking to me. Well, a discussion is always the product of at least TWO parties. So if this discussion has led nowhere, at least 50% of that is due to you, not me.

But that isn't my goal. I can see why you'd think it was, given what I described - but my actual goal is for me to trust my own perception more, not try to convince others. My favorite thing about this thread is the increased clarity I've gotten from the dialogue with another Ni-dom about Ni perception.

OK, cool then, I thought it was a problem for you if others didn't understand your thoughts.

Yeah, this is the problem with me and emoticons. What I meant in using that head-bang-wall one is that it seemed to me that if I continued to engage with you in the terms you were setting out, it would be, for me, like banging my head against a wall. And I didn't/don't want to do that. I really shouldn't use emoticons to try to communicate (except for the one with the pink handcuffs ... because really, that one is so completely self-explanatory that no one could possibly misinterpret it in any way).

Blahblahblahblah. I wasn't setting out any irreversible "terms", that's a figment of your imagination.

I would describe Ni more like a feeling or a teleportation thought. It's just suddenly there like I see something that suddenly triggers an Ni spark of insight. It's more reactionary. Ti is just my default err I kind of find it hard to describe it. I guess Ti is just more linear and factual and concrete like someone reading a book out loud.

ENTJ Ni is more sophisticated. They can absorb information subconsciously without really needing to do anything.

I see. Hmmh, I'd like to hear about ExNJ's

Mine's (Ni) got different manifestations I think. One version readily aligns with logical requirements that I have and another version doesn't.

I sometimes get eureka moments, triggered by whatever, just like you describe. However I always need to have the data that supports it or I will not rely on it. I just don't care to rely on it without something concrete supporting it.

I do relate to the "absorbing information" stuff though I'm not quite sure if it happens subconsciously. It's like, I read whatever information, I don't do anything with it at that point, but later it might start to make sense, either through logical reasoning or some insight might come up. Well if an insight comes up it should be logical too in some way and this usually isn't a problem. The only exception from that is certain psychological insights that I get at times. I have them infrequently but they always have a lot of impact, I've had them as a kid as well. Those are not logical and have never been and afraid they never will be But that sort of insight still makes sense, just not in a logical way

The Ti thing for me or whatever I call "Ti" at this point, it isn't linear much, instead I prefer it to be pretty holistic just like Lenore describes it. The best way for me to find the logic in something and then to use it in practice, is through my own experience, preferably concrete experience. I'm rather useless with it if I try to build the logic of something by just dealing with theory. I mean I can do it but it's just not the same. It's just meh... I will not feel like it's absorbed so deeply and not as ready for effortless use in practice.

You say your Ti is pretty linear and factual and concrete, sounds like it's fully conscious for you or something, otoh my "Ti stuff" is often just stuff that I don't even think about, I just "have" it and then if a situation calls for it, I will start using it effortlessly. Why I think it's Ti and not Ni, well, several reasons. A logical structure always belongs to this stuff. If I need to put this stuff into words for some reason - making it more conscious as well - I will then try to precisely flesh all of it out, I get really sensitive about noticing any seeming contradiction and fixing them. That actually happens also when I'm e.g. reading someone else's stuff. It's an automatic process really, I remember about a decade ago it wasn't, it wasn't so subconsciously automatic and even earlier it wasn't anywhere at all. One day I just noticed it appeared. It was fully conscious then, now it's less so because I got used to it. I developed all this around age 18-20. Before that age all the logic I had I just used for mathematics mainly. It was great use of logic and done in the same fashion as described above but I just didn't use it for much else.

It's somewhat confusing though because I know the development of wider application of this stuff originally started by me focusing on something that can be called textbook Ni. I don't think that makes any sense, sorry, it doesn't to me either.

FWIW, deep concern with precision in areas such as word usage can also play a role in the detailed intensive work of inductive logic processes. For example, developing truly useful and data-grounded categories from raw complex qualitative data requires a real and sustained concern with getting as much precision as possible in the development and description of categories - precision helps with clarity (the precision doesn't necessarily have to be in the in-process category names, but rather in the ways those categories are described and understood in the analysis). I say this from my experience with formal academic and other professional inductive processes such as developing grounded theory using carefully documented qualitative data coding, category development etc etc. While my real (and mostly hidden to others) internal process is likely Ni-shaped, the painstaking data-detailed formally inductive data coding and analysis processes I've had to go through in the professional and academic worlds seem associated with Ti-tert in me. Exhausting for me, but formally and demonstrably inductive. And Ni "psuedo-inductive" just doesn't cut it in those formal environments.

That was a good description as to why Ti can be inductive logic and about precision at the same time. That stuff you describe is quite compatible with the Ti definitions.

This came up in a dialogue with a friend...Ni conclusions feels like this to me...I am at point A (the question/problem) initially and Ni makes a (relatively quick) conclusion and jumps to point B (conclusion) which feels right...But I do not know why B feels right at that moment so cannot explain either to myself or others why it feels right...So Ti starts backtracking the solution route all the way to A, after which I can tell myself and others why it feels right (or wrong)...So Ni acts like teleporting all the way from A to B whereas Ti acts like going that path on foot back from B to A...

I've always imagined it was Ti-tert responsible for this delayed process (to flesh out, backtrack the route)...And I've associated it with cause and effect style reasoning...And I really need to force myself to bring my conclusion from the depths of Ni domain, perhaps that's why it may be consuming more energy...?

You're confusing me meheheh

What I mean is, I often experience the "teleporting" thing but it always seems logical to me and I have no problem fleshing out the logic. It's "wider" though than just "cause and effect". Holistic just like what Lenore says about Ti

So it's either that it isn't just Ni that can give conclusions so fast or that I have more Ni than Ti, but I don't think so. That Lenore Ti description really fits me so well, anyway. Whereas, taking the Ni descriptions that I've seen so far, I don't see myself in them so much.

Subject was the car and two people related to the subject in different ways that go hand in hand with Ti and Te relate to same subject in general. And yes its possible for an Te user to be a car mechanic, but i didnt write any more for my example than i did, so take it as it is and not try to see some hidden possibilities in some potential real life people. Those people in my example arent real, they only exist within the borders of what i wrote

I wasn't complicating it this much, I simply said that the example could be better...

no can do my Ni says motorcycles are dangerous

What kind of ISTP are you?!

 

[badger055]

I see. Hmmh, I'd like to hear about ExNJ's

Mine's (Ni) got different manifestations I think. One version readily aligns with logical requirements that I have and another version doesn't.

I sometimes get eureka moments, triggered by whatever, just like you describe. However I always need to have the data that supports it or I will not rely on it. I just don't care to rely on it without something concrete supporting it.

I do relate to the "absorbing information" stuff though I'm not quite sure if it happens subconsciously. It's like, I read whatever information, I don't do anything with it at that point, but later it might start to make sense, either through logical reasoning or some insight might come up. Well if an insight comes up it should be logical too in some way and this usually isn't a problem. The only exception from that is certain psychological insights that I get at times. I have them infrequently but they always have a lot of impact, I've had them as a kid as well. Those are not logical and have never been and afraid they never will be But that sort of insight still makes sense, just not in a logical way

The Ti thing for me or whatever I call "Ti" at this point, it isn't linear much, instead I prefer it to be pretty holistic just like Lenore describes it. The best way for me to find the logic in something and then to use it in practice, is through my own experience, preferably concrete experience. I'm rather useless with it if I try to build the logic of something by just dealing with theory. I mean I can do it but it's just not the same. It's just meh... I will not feel like it's absorbed so deeply and not as ready for effortless use in practice.

You say your Ti is pretty linear and factual and concrete, sounds like it's fully conscious for you or something, otoh my "Ti stuff" is often just stuff that I don't even think about, I just "have" it and then if a situation calls for it, I will start using it effortlessly. Why I think it's Ti and not Ni, well, several reasons. A logical structure always belongs to this stuff. If I need to put this stuff into words for some reason - making it more conscious as well - I will then try to precisely flesh all of it out, I get really sensitive about noticing any seeming contradiction and fixing them. That actually happens also when I'm e.g. reading someone else's stuff. It's an automatic process really, I remember about a decade ago it wasn't, it wasn't so subconsciously automatic and even earlier it wasn't anywhere at all. One day I just noticed it appeared. It was fully conscious then, now it's less so because I got used to it. I developed all this around age 18-20. Before that age all the logic I had I just used for mathematics mainly. It was great use of logic and done in the same fashion as described above but I just didn't use it for much else.

It's somewhat confusing though because I know the development of wider application of this stuff originally started by me focusing on something that can be called textbook Ni. I don't think that makes any sense, sorry, it doesn't to me either.

I feel like I'm drowning in your thought process. Whenever I read something my Ti always picks out the most relevant things and I'm not sure if any of that is relevant. Inside your brain must be a jungle. I don't know much more about ENTJ Ni besides the obvious stuff.

I sometimes get eureka moments, triggered by whatever, just like you describe. However I always need to have the data that supports it or I will not rely on it. I just don't care to rely on it without something concrete supporting it.

Sounds pretty ENTJ to me. My Ni insights are pretty accurate I guess cause they are matched up with Ti and the conclusion jumps it makes aren't very big. I don't really think to not trust them most of the time.

You say your Ti is pretty linear and factual and concrete, sounds like it's fully conscious for you or something

When I'm using Ti I'm not really aware I am. I'm inside my head thinking about stuff cut off from the world. If you ask me to describe what I was just doing I'm like ummm. It's like following a river stream. Using Ti detaches you from your senses making you look autistic.

The Ti thing for me or whatever I call "Ti" at this point, it isn't linear much, instead I prefer it to be pretty holistic just like Lenore describes it.

Did you just mention socionics to me in a round about way? I can't take you seriously now don't ever talk to me about socionics. Conversation over.

 

[Werebudgie]

[MENTION=20622]valaki[/MENTION],

You know, I really was/am bored by what is for me a truly rock-bottom introductory level of discussion of N/S as perceptual functions with so little cultural emphasis. That kind of discussion bores me. Others might find it fascinating. I was not offended in any way by what you wanted to discuss about N/S and direct etc. I'm sorry if this is hard to hear, but truly, your approach to that part of the dialogue bored me. It's not an assessment that it will bore everyone. Just me. Another example of lack of understanding between is: for me, it wasn't that I felt you were setting irreversible terms, it was that to engage with you, I needed to engage on your terms, try to shift the terms (boring, pointless and quite likely irritating for me, in my estimation) or we'd have been talking past each other.

And I'm really not happy that because of all that you decided not to talk about your own thoughts

Overall, I didn't find your approach to the various topics in that comment thread useful for mutual dialogue. This is not an assessment of you only. It is an assessment of what I thought possible/not possible in mutual dialogue between us given how you were approaching the topics at hand and what I know about myself and my interests and approaches to things. And yes, IMO you are completely correct in assigning mutual responsibility for this situation. I agree with you on this:

Well, a discussion is always the product of at least TWO parties. So if this discussion has led nowhere, at least 50% of that is due to you, not me.

Yes, I'm fine with that responsibility. Probably more than 50% due to me. After all, I was the one who unilaterally decided that I wasn't interested in continuing the conversation with you on the topics in your reply, based on various factors, some I mentioned and some I didn't. That decision and assessment and response was most certainly my responsibility. In a voluntary dialogue/learning environment like this, I'm the one who decides when and how and with whom I share my thoughts and I assume others can do the same on their end. While I hear you that you are "really not happy that ... {I} decided not to talk about {my} own thoughts," I don't feel any obligation to share in order to make you happy or anything along those lines. There are lots of other people here and some of them are likely very interested in dialogue with you on the topics that I'm not.

You also pigeonholed me by assuming that it would be like banging your head into the wall if you continued talking to me.

Your ego concerns aside - like you said, it takes two. Meaning: It wasn't you alone I decided would be like that. It was the interaction between you and me. That implicates me as much as you, if not me more since I made the decision.

All that said ... glad my description of precision and my Ti-tert coding/analysis experiences saved you the work of explaining something. I'm kind of vaguely in-process re: that whole topic (Ti/Te/inductive/deductive) and will have my eyes open for any discussion that unfolds from there.

 

[valaki]

I feel like I'm drowning in your thought process. Whenever I read something my Ti always picks out the most relevant things and I'm not sure if any of that is relevant. Inside your brain must be a jungle. I don't know much more about ENTJ Ni besides the obvious stuff.

No, you can't really see my internal thought processes from a forum post. I think all the stuff I posted is relevant in terms of giving a detailed description about how I relate to Ti and/or Ni, which was my goal.

Too bad about not much more on ENTJ, thanks anyway. I hope someone else can chime in.

Sounds pretty ENTJ to me. My Ni insights are pretty accurate I guess cause they are matched up with Ti and the conclusion jumps it makes aren't very big. I don't really think to not trust them most of the time.

Yes, mine are usually good too. Do you mean the requirement for data supporting the insight is Te-ish / ENTJ-ish?

When I'm using Ti I'm not really aware I am. I'm inside my head thinking about stuff cut off from the world. If you ask me to describe what I was just doing I'm like ummm. It's like following a river stream. Using Ti detaches you from your senses making you look autistic.

Lol I see.

Did you just mention socionics to me in a round about way? I can't take you seriously now don't ever talk to me about socionics. Conversation over.

Nope, Lenore Thomson is an MBTI author, not socionics. Or why did you think this was socionics?

See Lenore wiki here (still dead for some reason so I linked from archive.org) https://web.archive.org/web/20121117000358/http://greenlightwiki.com/lenore-exegesis/ (Ti and the other functions are under "the function attitudes") This is her own version of MBTI sort of, but it's still MBTI related and not socionics.

Btw is your problem with socionics that it's more complex than MBTI or what?

 

[valaki]

[MENTION=20789]Werebudgie[/MENTION]

You know, I really was/am bored by what is for me a truly rock-bottom introductory level of discussion of N/S as perceptual functions with so little cultural emphasis. That kind of discussion bores me. (...)

You have a weird way of expressing feeling of boredom, then.

You still seem to fail to realize that your pigeonholing of me was done too quickly.

For one, you're terribly wrong in assuming that the terms could not have been shifted. Why the fuck do you assume so much without checking with the facts?

How about you learn checking things first before assuming all that bullshit about whoever you're talking to. Go out and experiment and see more.

You saw only a few superficial lines from me. Yep you only saw the superficial, nothing more. I don't care if you're Ni-dom or not, it does not make you infallible in your judgements any more than anyone else.

Now, don't worry, I'm not trying to force a continuation of the original dialogue, I simply don't care to be judged this superficially.

 

[valaki]

I agree with this except for deciding on what you called "unconscious biases". I'm pretty sure my type for instance has very little unconscious biases, generally being one of the most self-conscious types of all. The biases we have are mostly known to our own conscious mind.

I wanted to reply to this earlier; You're terribly wrong in assuming that a type has fewer unconscious biases than another type. This isn't type dependent.

 

[badger055]

No, you can't really see my internal thought processes from a forum post. I think all the stuff I posted is relevant in terms of giving a detailed description about how I relate to Ti and/or Ni, which was my goal.

Too bad about not much more on ENTJ, thanks anyway. I hope someone else can chime in.




Yes, mine are usually good too. Do you mean the requirement for data supporting the insight is Te-ish / ENTJ-ish?




Lol I see.




Nope, Lenore Thomson is an MBTI author, not socionics. Or why did you think this was socionics?

See Lenore wiki here (still dead for some reason so I linked from archive.org) https://web.archive.org/web/20121117000358/http://greenlightwiki.com/lenore-exegesis/ (Ti and the other functions are under "the function attitudes") This is her own version of MBTI sort of, but it's still MBTI related and not socionics.

Btw is your problem with socionics that it's more complex than MBTI or what?

Now that I think about it ENFJ could also fit for you. It would explain all your enthusiasm and why you would think you are istp (ENFJ shadow type is ISTP). They are ambitious like ENTJs.

Yes, mine are usually good too. Do you mean the requirement for data supporting the insight is Te-ish / ENTJ-ish?

Because your Ni jumps are so big that you are not sure if they are true or not. That's a problem intuitives have.

Nope, Lenore Thomson is an MBTI author, not socionics. Or why did you think this was socionics?

See Lenore wiki here (still dead for some reason so I linked from archive.org) https://web.archive.org/web/20121117...nore-exegesis/ (Ti and the other functions are under "the function attitudes") This is her own version of MBTI sort of, but it's still MBTI related and not socionics.

Btw is your problem with socionics that it's more complex than MBTI or what?

Well lenore thomson sounds like an idiot. I'm more inclined to trust first hand sources rather than something I read that's the Se way. You have a real Ti user standing right here and you are going to trust a book about a Ti user? When people do that they usually have Te/Si. There is nothing hollistic about Ti that is Ni.

My problem is that ISTP is split up into two different types in socionics so there is no real ISTP type in socoinics. How can you have a system with no ISTP? The whole thing is just retarded. There is no point to socionics it's like a meth addict wrote it. Now no more socoinics talk it makes my blood boil.

 

[valaki]

Now that I think about it ENFJ could also fit for you. It would explain all your enthusiasm and why you would think you are istp (ENFJ shadow type is ISTP). They are ambitious like ENTJs.

Well I'm going to put that type in the list of types in my profile

Because your Ni jumps are so big that you are not sure if they are true or not. That's a problem intuitives have.

Uhh maybe. I'll try to think of some examples and then it could be compared with other people's stuff here and see if they're big or not.

Well lenore thomson sounds like an idiot. I'm more inclined to trust first hand sources rather than something I read that's the Se way. You have a real Ti user standing right here and you are going to trust a book about a Ti user? When people do that they usually have Te/Si. There is nothing hollistic about Ti that is Ni.

It's not that I trust a book by whoever. It's that I found it fascinating, how the description nailed a big part of my thinking. It's another issue altogether how that "thing" can be categorized. Ti, Ni, or whatever.

My problem is that ISTP is split up into two different types in socionics so there is no real ISTP type in socoinics. How can you have a system with no ISTP? The whole thing is just retarded. There is no point to socionics it's like a meth addict wrote it. Now no more socoinics talk it makes my blood boil.

Lol you're funny and I mean it

Anyway yeah it's a different system. ISTP isn't the only MBTI type that doesn't have a direct equivalent in socionics. That system is definitely not going to match up with MBTI in a simple linear way. Some people find that MBTI describes them better and some find the socionics type descriptions better or enneagram or whatnot. That's inevitable if none of the systems cover everything perfectly.

 

[badger055]

Well I'm going to put that type in the list of types in my profile

Yep I would say 200% chance of ENFJ. You make a lot more sense now. Should look into it and since you are sx/sp you won't be the typical social ENFJ like it says in the descriptions.

 

[valaki]

Yep I would say 200% chance of ENFJ. You make a lot more sense now. Should look into it and since you are sx/sp you won't be the typical social ENFJ like it says in the descriptions.

Lol well thanks, I will be checking it out.