[Jungian Cognitive Functions] Ni - What the hell is it?

[FemMecha]

I've read Bagan's book and he was the same way until he "came face-to-face" with a ghost. Until that time he didn't think about ghosts. I've read his personal ghost story and what would make it more convincing is the fact that these strange events went on for a week before they finally came face-to-face with each other. The same goes for the person who felt an invisible presence in her car.

So while I'm not negating anything you say at all, there is a difference between those who are convinced and those who are unconvinced.

The person you describe may have certitude about reality based on feeling and experience over definable fact.

I have found in many discussion there can be a disconnect if someone has a strong judging preference that assumes there are two reactions to information
1. embrace it as fact
2. dismiss it as false.
There is a third option that is the home of pure Perception and that is to
3. observe and wonder w/o conclusion

I've had some rather strange experiences and "saw" various ghosts while living in one particular apartment, but interestingly enough, it didn't make me believe in ghosts. It helped that one apparition was of my current boyfriend who lived down the street, so I researched and found information on hypnopompic hallucinations that occur at the edge of sleep. I've also had a strong "feeling" that recently deceased people are present or viewing the world through my eyes, but I don't draw a conclusion about it. The most significant experience was when my former partner's dog died, I have a vivid feeling for the next three days that he was viewing the world through my eyes. Every detail and impression lined up with how I would expect the dog to see the world, even feeling fatigue over language use in thought. I live without conclusion about it. The most probable explanation based on everything in my internal framework is that it is a powerful psychological phenomenon for dealing with loss. Because the experience was so vivd and it felt like I learned new information through it, there is a part of me that goes back to those concepts from physicists that "time is an illusion" or from the Buddhists that "separateness is an illusion" that makes me wonder if when our perceptions fall outside of our assumptions about concrete space and linear time, that it could be possible that we are viewing that more fundamental aspect of reality in which everything exists as a singularity of space and time. I don't think that is fact, but I remember the experiences as providing information about reality, whether it is merely a neurological phenomenon or that much of our perceived reality is an illusion.

 

[Mal12345]

The person you describe may have certitude about reality based on feeling and experience over definable fact.

I have found in many discussion there can be a disconnect if someone has a strong judging preference that assumes there are two reactions to information
1. embrace it as fact
2. dismiss it as false.
There is a third option that is the home of pure Perception and that is to
3. observe and wonder w/o conclusion

I've had some rather strange experiences and "saw" various ghosts while living in one particular apartment, but interestingly enough, it didn't make me believe in ghosts. It helped that one apparition was of my current boyfriend who lived down the street, so I researched and found information on hypnopompic hallucinations that occur at the edge of sleep. I've also had a strong "feeling" that recently deceased people are present or viewing the world through my eyes, but I don't draw a conclusion about it. The most significant experience was when my former partner's dog died, I have a vivid feeling for the next three days that he was viewing the world through my eyes. Every detail and impression lined up with how I would expect the dog to see the world, even feeling fatigue over language use in thought. I live without conclusion about it. The most probable explanation based on everything in my internal framework is that it is a powerful psychological phenomenon for dealing with loss. Because the experience was so vivd and it felt like I learned new information through it, there is a part of me that goes back to those concepts from physicists that "time is an illusion" or from the Buddhists that "separateness is an illusion" that makes me wonder if when our perceptions fall outside of our assumptions about concrete space and linear time, that it could be possible that we are viewing that more fundamental aspect of reality in which everything exists as a singularity of space and time. I don't think that is fact, but I remember the experiences as providing information about reality, whether it is merely a neurological phenomenon or that much of our perceived reality is an illusion.

1. embrace it as fact
2. dismiss it as false.
There is a third option that is the home of pure Perception and that is to
3. observe and wonder w/o conclusion

I agree with that list. But what causes 1, 2, or 3 to occur? What drives that choice?

There has to be a factor outside of function analysis. In Zak Bagans case, that would be the feeling of purposelessness he describers in his book. Chasing ghosts gives his life purpose.

So as usual, I'm not disagreeing with you. I have nothing against pure perception or objective awareness which are the same as withholding judgment. "Hypnopompic" is a new term to me, although I'd heard of "hypnagogic" before. I've had hypnagogic experiences (which were predictions about fortune misfortune) and I've also had hypnopompic experiences.

On a related side note, some of the ghost clips that I've seen on Ghost Adventures indicate that some spirits want people to be asleep before they try to influence them.

I don't want this to stray far from the Ni topic, or else we will experience the misfortune of having our posts Graveyarded. But I would just like to add that even if multiple people experience the same physically inexplicable incident while being wide awake, most if not all scientists will dismiss it as a mass hallucination (option 2).

 

[Mal12345]

I have an example of option 3 (observer and wonder without conclusion) -

 

[windoverlake]

Gregor Samsa

 

[pinkgraffiti]

I have an example of option 3 (observer and wonder without conclusion) -

OMG this shit really scares me! wtf!
[MENTION=19552]Destiny[/MENTION] that story of the detective could easily be applied to an Ne-dom person too. I dont see what's so particularly Ni about it. In fact, most of the descriptions and examples I've read on this thread of Ni I think could easily be Ne (I see myself possibly doing them)
[MENTION=14857]fia[/MENTION] jesus! you are making me terrified with these stories of ghosts and blah. grrr please put a spoiler for me (im not kidding)

 

[Duffy]

[MENTION=19552]Destiny[/MENTION] that story of the detective could easily be applied to an Ne-dom person too. I dont see what's so particularly Ni about it. In fact, most of the descriptions and examples I've read on this thread of Ni I think could easily be Ne (I see myself possibly doing them)

It sounds like deductive reasoning, which I think is more Ne (external > objective > contextual). So I disagree with Destiny. Ni is more inductive (subjective) > Thinking about Mal's examples.

 

[FemMecha]

I have an example of option 3 (observer and wonder without conclusion) -

Is this what happens when someone gets bitten by a radioactive beetle during mating season?

 

[Eric B]

Ben Kovitz, who ran the old "Lenore Thomson wiki" (and is very influenced by her as I am) was discussing the functions on a list, and made this great explanation of Ni and its difference from Ne:

"Intuition is guessing—or rather, orienting by what seems to you to be a good guess even though the facts aren't in. Why does it seem like such a good guess? Well, with Extraverted Intuition, you can point out the things [i.e. in the environment="e"] that suggest your guess so that other people start to see the possibility, too; with Introverted Intuition, you can't. WIth Extraverted Intuition, the guess keeps changing as new information is revealed [again, from the environment]: as parts of the big picture get filled in, your guess about the whole absorbs them and revises in unpredictable ways. You need a constant influx of new information to keep triggering you to revise your guesses. With Introverted Intuition, the guess might start "reply hazy, try later" and gradually clarify, but it's somewhat impervious to new information. You search within [individually="i"], ideas come, and you trust them. If information comes in that contradicts the guess, you just tune it out or call it an illusion.
So the Introverted Intuitive attitude aims at getting ahead of all consciously accessible information—including, especially, direct experience."

This seems to be the best explanation I've seen, especially regarding what really makes it "internal" or introverted. (It's often simply called "the unconscious", which he had also just used, but as I pointed out, "unconscious" has several uses, and so Jung and others' definitions with that term never "clicked" for me. I then figured it involved some sort of "impressions" that come up, like "hunches", and I didn't know whether these were just things that were "there" involuntarily, or not, but saying it's a "guess" that you deliberately look within to see what ideas come up, really clarifies it for me). It's the "trust" in these ideas that makes it an introverted attitude. With me, I keep looking on the outside (and this is actually stuff "stored in memory" as Lenore puts it, and this helps me, as "memory" is technically "inside", so it begged the question of the real difference with Ni's "internal" source and Ne's "memory". Ne is memory of externally based patterns (such as "contexts") you can guess from, while Ni is just stuff from the unconscious that you basically seek to fill in the information. (Hence, "freeing sense impressions from their larger [external] contexts" as Lenore puts it).
Me; I'll get these internal images or sense of things, but I don't trust them. They're just "there", and I almost always assume it's "illusion" or irrelevent. (To the point that I did not even know these were what Ni was based off of, and what could also be used to fill in a situation).

 

[SearchingforPeace]

My intuition never feels like a guess....I just know it.

Me; I'll get these internal images or sense of things, but I don't trust them. They're just "there", and I almost always assume it's "illusion" or irrelevent. (To the point that I did not even know these were what Ni was based off of, and what could also be used to fill in a situation).

I stopped trusting my intuition for years....as I made way too many choices based on it that I didn't like the outcomes....not that it was wrong, I just didn't like the outcomes.

But I am much, much in touch with myself now that I roll with my intuition. It might need some framing to make sense of it, but it is far better to trust yourself and be yourself rather than some artificial construct fearful of their own guidance.

 

[Jaguar]

Ni, from Gary Hartzler's book:
Functions of Type: Activities to Develop the Eight Jungian Functions - Gary Hartzler, Margaret Hartzler - Google Books

Scroll down to read the entire section; it's not just one page.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

Ni, from Gary Hartzler's book:
Functions of Type: Activities to Develop the Eight Jungian Functions - Gary Hartzler, Margaret Hartzler - Google Books

Scroll down to read the entire section; it's not just one page.

The way most people think of typology here doesn't allow for an individual function. They view someone as consisting of only two functions, and that's it.

 

[Jaguar]

The way most people think of typology here doesn't allow for an individual function. They view someone as consisting of only two functions, and that's it.

I don't care what most people do.

 

[Eric B]

Hartzler is good, but that description I find typical, in not spelling out clear enough where these "abstract ideas, images and/or conceptualizations" come from. It says the function "resolve these ideas and images into symbols", which it then "further attaches subjective meaning" to them, but this is not really getting straight at the point that the "images" are subjectively derived [i.e. "internal"] as well. It's easy to get distracted with some of those terms, so we end up fumbling through all of these descriptions of what Ni does, and not really what it is.

 

[INTJ123]

Ni doms just day dream a lot. You want to experience Ni then just day dream away, dream with your eyes open.....

 

[FemMecha]

After watching Carl Jung discuss Ni, I think some of my experiences that I attribute to imagination are Ni related.

I have a lot of life experiences that I am in the process of healing from, and one of my most effective therapies occurs for me when I'm in a hot tub of water. Striking imagery comes to me and my body responds in an involuntary manner. I've had a long history of chronic muscle tension and pain, and I get these vivid images that thin, blue, iridescent strands are leaving my muscles. Sometimes they depart quickly in a swarm and my muscles jerk heavily in response as they are letting go. It is a disturbing experience and I haven't gotten a good explanation medically, but I think it is a good thing that something is being released. I've also had striking imagery of an iridescent goo that is mostly pearly white with shimmers of all rainbow colors slowly melting through me, permeating every cell of my body, and that can also trigger the muscle releases. When I get overwhelmed, I end up in a small, white concrete or marble pond on a distant planet that has no other inhabitants except for me and one robot. The sky is an intense blue, the marble a bright white, and I am near a structure with strong geometric lines, but it is likely the only structure on the planet. I can feel the isolation, almost the fear of it, but also the safety of it.

I also become an embryo with no memories, good or bad, but just the peaceful darkness of unknowing. There are also glimmers of anticipation at being able to experience the sun, the sound of water, the sensation of running, etc. all again for the first time. I see everything in my life drifting away into a tunnel of darkness and I just let go indiscriminately. It is scary to let go of what could be good also, but now it feels necessary to let go of it all with no judgement on any of it, and then I see it slide away into the blackness of infinity.

 

[FemMecha]

Ben Kovitz, who ran the old "Lenore Thomson wiki" (and is very influenced by her as I am) was discussing the functions on a list, and made this great explanation of Ni and its difference from Ne:

"Intuition is guessing—or rather, orienting by what seems to you to be a good guess even though the facts aren't in. Why does it seem like such a good guess? Well, with Extraverted Intuition, you can point out the things [i.e. in the environment="e"] that suggest your guess so that other people start to see the possibility, too; with Introverted Intuition, you can't. WIth Extraverted Intuition, the guess keeps changing as new information is revealed [again, from the environment]: as parts of the big picture get filled in, your guess about the whole absorbs them and revises in unpredictable ways. You need a constant influx of new information to keep triggering you to revise your guesses. With Introverted Intuition, the guess might start "reply hazy, try later" and gradually clarify, but it's somewhat impervious to new information. You search within [individually="i"], ideas come, and you trust them. If information comes in that contradicts the guess, you just tune it out or call it an illusion.
So the Introverted Intuitive attitude aims at getting ahead of all consciously accessible information—including, especially, direct experience."

This seems to be the best explanation I've seen, especially regarding what really makes it "internal" or introverted. (It's often simply called "the unconscious", which he had also just used, but as I pointed out, "unconscious" has several uses, and so Jung and others' definitions with that term never "clicked" for me. I then figured it involved some sort of "impressions" that come up, like "hunches", and I didn't know whether these were just things that were "there" involuntarily, or not, but saying it's a "guess" that you deliberately look within to see what ideas come up, really clarifies it for me). It's the "trust" in these ideas that makes it an introverted attitude. With me, I keep looking on the outside (and this is actually stuff "stored in memory" as Lenore puts it, and this helps me, as "memory" is technically "inside", so it begged the question of the real difference with Ni's "internal" source and Ne's "memory". Ne is memory of externally based patterns (such as "contexts") you can guess from, while Ni is just stuff from the unconscious that you basically seek to fill in the information. (Hence, "freeing sense impressions from their larger [external] contexts" as Lenore puts it).
Me; I'll get these internal images or sense of things, but I don't trust them. They're just "there", and I almost always assume it's "illusion" or irrelevent. (To the point that I did not even know these were what Ni was based off of, and what could also be used to fill in a situation).

That part that I bolded and made larger is something that I've heard about Ni, but am never quite certain how to relate to it. I think the introverted Judging functions (Ti and Fi) build up inner frameworks of reasoned associations in which you can make the judgment call on each new piece of data whether it fits the framework and should be accepted or it doesn't fit the framework and therefore not be accepted.

I don't think the perceiving functions operate in that manner. Se takes in all the sensations of the moment. Si takes in every experience, however it was presented in life, Ne takes in the unseen connections of the moment, and Ni internalizes the unseen connections in a more personal manner. I tend to feel as though Ni is a data dump that I wish to god I could reject at times. I wish I could reject parts of it, but life feels like an ongoing tidal wave of intangible, unverifiable information. I don't think Pi (introverted perception) has the advantage that Ji (introverted Judging) experiences in its ability to filter before data is internalized. It can only filter afterwards, but for myself (and I can only speak for myself) it feels like life constantly throws millions of puzzle pieces at me, so many that I am surrounded by mountains of these. I obsessively try to piece them together. Each time I find one that doesn't fit, I don't dare throw it away because it might fit later on. In the same way Si doesn't get to choose its life experiences, it doesn't choose the sensations that build its sense of normalcy and nostalgia, neither does Ni. Ni doesn't let you choose anything - it isn't a judging function. One must rely on their other judging function to deal with it. When Ni is the dominant function, then you deal with this ongoing tidal wave and you only wish something would filter it first, but no such luck.

 

[Forever]

@fia @Eric B

The highlighted portion would be wrong use of Fe and Te in tandem with Ni, Ni perceives not judges is where I would see it at. Ni synthesizes so even accepts contradictory information, if it were to deny it, it's going further from reality.

 

[FemMecha]

How much certitude is inherent in Ni?

I recently watched Carl Jung's video describing Ni and his example is a patient who came to him complaining of a black snake in her abdomen. She told him it would take ten sessions to correct it. He describes that she did not have schizophrenia and she acknowledged it wasn't a literal snake, but that her internal intuition created a sense of reality known only to her, and she used metaphor to describe the intangible. She also came for ten sessions and was 'healed' at the end.

I'm curious about this because if Ni is in fact defined by certitude, then it wouldn't be my dominant function. I can relate to the internal language of metaphor and detachment, but I'm a careful thinker. My sense of reality is never finalized. Is that true of the Ji-doms or Pi-doms? It makes me question my type, as a side note. It seemed to make more sense for Pi-doms, but if Jung defines Ni as correlating with certitude, then my ideas about it are wrong.

It is valuable for this thread topic to address this issue of how Ni relates to certitude.

 

[Mal12345]

How much certitude is inherent in Ni?

I recently watched Carl Jung's video describing Ni and his example is a patient who came to him complaining of a black snake in her abdomen. She told him it would take ten sessions to correct it. He describes that she did not have schizophrenia and she acknowledged it wasn't a literal snake, but that her internal intuition created a sense of reality known only to her, and she used metaphor to describe the intangible. She also came for ten sessions and was 'healed' at the end.

I'm curious about this because if Ni is in fact defined by certitude, then it wouldn't be my dominant function. I can relate to the internal language of metaphor and detachment, but I'm a careful thinker. My sense of reality is never finalized. Is that true of the Ji-doms or Pi-doms? It makes me question my type, as a side note. It seemed to make more sense for Pi-doms, but if Jung defines Ni as correlating with certitude, then my ideas about it are wrong.

It is valuable for this thread topic to address this issue of how Ni relates to certitude.

You're assuming that Ni brought certitude. As an intuition it only brings a form of perception. Some other function, such as a judging function, must lend the perception certainty.

 

[Virtual ghost]

You're assuming that Ni brought certitude. As an intuition it only brings a form of perception. Some other function, such as a judging function, must lend the perception certainty.

This is such a NP thing to say.

In my experience Ni can create a model/plan in instant and this plan will be a prefectly workable solution. There is no step by step brainstorming and many doubts.
The only thing you have to pay attention to is that at the start of the process you have correct information that matches reality.