Personality Cafe banner
Cancel
Create thread New Forums

How do you know if you're using Ni and how does it differ from being Ni-dominant?

Tags
introverted intuition introverted intuitive intuition ni-dom ni-dominant
Jump to Latest
24K views 49 replies 19 participants last post by  Entropic  
F
#1 · (Edited)
I've been recently identified as an INTJ because of my high Fi (in relation to my measly Fe) and Te, and how I've been told that I experience Ni-Fi loops (I've read the "Recognizing the Inferior Function" threads on INTP and INTJ).

Something just doesn't settle with me, though: I don't feel like I have Ni, but how can I be an INTJ without having the function that significantly makes an INTJ an INTJ? I don't have ground-breaking "insights" or "Eureka!" moments that a lot of people are referring to. Maybe I just don't have enough information, or my brain just doesn't think/process information that way. I feel like I don't use Ni (or if I have, I don't remember/recognise it at all).

The only explanation that I found that I could relate to (the bolded one) was IonOfAeons' description in the "Ni: Just what the hell is it? XD" thread.

IonOfAeons said:
Ni is confusing...
It's really hard to know where you're looking when you come up with an answer using it. 'Multiple interpretations' is a good description because unlike Ne, it doesn't really seem to generate anything, it's just a master synthesizer.

Comparing Ne and Ni, think of having a destination you have to get to. Ne will see the distant spark of it and build looking at the obstacles all around it. You'll take that object to block this hazard, then look for the next thing to help you get over that wall, etc.
With Ni you would look at the destination and feel sure that there was some predetermined path that you were looking for. This relates to looking inwards and then having 'ah-ha!' moments because suddenly the timings and patterns make sense and you're not looking for ways to overcome your obstacles, you're merging with the obstacles so they actually turn out to have the answer for getting you to your destination. You didn't have to change them, you simply had to find a way of integrating yourself with them.
Click to expand...
Since I don't yet fully grasp the concept of Ni, I don't know how accurate his explanation is. Also, I may have only used certain functions a few times; I don't think I'd qualify to be a Ni-dom if I've only used it a few times in my life (assuming that this explanation is true). I don't think just "predicting" situations is enough to justify being a Ni-dom.

Examples:

A lot of people can predict things/scenes in movies (well, mainly because they're predictable), but it doesn't mean that they're Ni-dom.

Late November a Burger King was being constructed near us, and all the banner said "Opening December 2013." I said "Psh, yeah—December 31."

(While these may be called "predictions," I don't really see how only Ni-doms or Ni-strong types think of them. With just a vague "Opening December 2013," of course BK will open on Dec. 31—they'd say "Well, technically we did open during December.")

I've read the descriptions from careerplanner, cognitiveprocesses[dot]com, keys2cognition, oddlydevelopedtypes (plus some others I can't remember) and these threads (since I can't post links yet):

Is an insight from Ti or Ni?
Ni: Just what the hell is it? XD
Introverted Intuition (Ni): Your Experience As An INTJ
Ti vs. Ni
Ni instead of Ne
The Ti vs. Ni one with "The Sequel" in the title (However, after a reading the first posts, it doesn't look like it would have any new information, so I didn't finish it.)

I forgot the others.

Could it be possible to be totally unaware that you've been using Ni? If so, how do you become aware of it? (I have a feeling that someone would say something with the main idea/point as "You just do," but still—there may be others.)

How would a Ni-dominant person differ from a person who only occasionally uses Ni?

Edit: I realised just now that my thread title was poorly phrased and I omitted some parts that should've gone in between. :/ Hopefully the idea is still intact...
 
#2 ·
Ni is symbolic in nature.

Here is an example of the symbolic and predictive nature of Ni from Jung:

In another account of the same case, Jung mentions "a young woman about 27 or 28" who informed him during her initial analytic session that she had a snake in her belly: "Her first words were when I had seated her, 'You know, doctor, I come to you because I have a snake in my abdomen.'" Jung exclaimed: "What?!" The woman replied: "'Yes, a snake, a black snake coiled up right in the bottom of my abdomen.'" According to Jung, "I must have made a rather bewildered face at her, for she said, 'You know, I don't mean it literally, but I should say it was a snake, a snake.'" In the middle of her analysis, "which lasted only for ten consultations," the woman told Jung that she had predicted how the analysis would conclude: "'I'll come ten times, and then it will be all right.'" How, Jung asked, did she know? "'Oh,'" she said, "'I've got a hunch.'" When the woman appeared for her fifth or sixth session, she said, 'Oh, doctor, I must tell you, the snake has risen, it is now about here'" (1977: 309). When she appeared for her tenth session, Jung inquired: "'Now this is our last consultation. Do you feel cured?'" (1977: 309-10). The woman said: "'You know, this morning it came up, it came out of my mouth, and the head was golden'" (1977: 310).
Click to expand...
I'd be willing to bet that this person is an INFJ. I am not sure how similar or different Ni would be experienced in an INTJ.
 
E
#4 ·
PaladinX said:
Ni is symbolic in nature.

Here is an example of the symbolic and predictive nature of Ni from Jung:



I'd be willing to bet that this person is an INFJ. I am not sure how similar or different Ni would be experienced in an INTJ.
Click to expand...
Very different and yes, you are right that person was likely an INFJ or perhaps an ENFJ. I find that INFJs like how to say... more anecdotal ways of putting things. Flowery, perhaps. As an INTJ my worldview isn't as organic but more mechanical, so I would attempt to express the same through the use known physiological terms instead.

Also a good example of how intuition can be concrete, in my opinion.

As for the OP, the OP sounds like an xNTP to me, not INTJ.
 
K
#3 ·
INTJ's are actually quite sufficiently in touch with Fi, it's not their strongest function, not something they prefer as a main filter between them and the world, but Fi affects INTJ's more than they would like to acknowledge, since Ni works on relatively emotionless plane, and Te just plainly ignores emotion-based judgements.

I would use some songs as examples: I would describe Ni-Fi through this song (typed this band as INTJ)

 

I would describe Fi-Ni loop through this song (typed this band as ISFP)

 

I don't mean that you should reconsider your type based on which song you relate to the most, I merely posted them so I could save some time from compiling a long rant or list for you on how Ni-Fi loop or Fi-Ni loop differ, since music can sometimes say a thousand words. If you can gain the same vibes from these songs, maybe it helps you to understand better how these loops differ from one another, and thus helps you to gain more insight, or learn something on your own :proud:
 
#7 ·
:laughing: Only an INTJ would come up with such a description of Ni :p
Btw, this isn't the only method that indicates Ni. I just thought of another method.
If a person gets too lost in thoughts and contemplation and they ended up getting run over by a vehicle and died, then that person can be very sure that they are using Ni too.
Btw, why does people who use Ni have such a tragic way of dying? :laughing:
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
P
#10 ·
Ni concerns itself with the nature of a thing. It's essence, devoid of how it appears... because the nature of a thing is not found in it's appearance. The more pronounced the emphasis on the nature of things is, the more the details of those things are put aside. An S might think/speak at length about observable aspects, or 'stuff', but deprioritize what it all 'means'. That isn't to say that they aren't capable of this, but their minds tend to orient to what exists rather than what those things might symbolize.

Thus, the woman with the 'snake' in her stomach was simply oriented to the nature of the thing. The nature of it was best described as a snake. That is the image, the idea, the common symbol that best reflected what she was experiencing. Why not simply discuss the details of the feeling? Well, sometimes an Ni dom will do just that, but their mind more naturally inclines to it's nature.

This isn't always so poetic, and needn't be at all. However, an Ni-dom will indeed find their mind reaching out for good symbols, decoupled from the details of the moment, to communicate.

A fundamental difference between Ni and Ne is that Ni seeks for the 'symbol' (or simply way of seeing it) that resonates the nature of the thing most for them. This is, by it's nature, somewhat private - and thus somewhat idiosyncratic. Ni symbols, paradigms, ideologies, platforms, world views, whatever, often are the sorts of things that take some indoctrination to get into sync with. Ni doms are sometimes seen as 'cultish' in this way, but it is simply that their vision of the nature of things are often decoupled from appearance and make no attempt at consensus for it's own sake.

Ne, on the other hand, yearns for consensus. Objectivity. It asks symbols to be universal, and is very quick to understand the 'gist' of the nature of a thing than to dive deep into a subjective view of that nature. Ne, most notably, is also quick to induct another perspective concerning that nature. It is often said that Ne sees that nature of things as multi-faceted, and attempts to create a mosaic by inducting all possible interpretations of the essence of things.... anticipating that from that mosaic, a broader perspective will emerge. This is why Ne types are perhaps the most inclined to innovation.

When an Ni innovates, it's often something the Ne would never have seen, having been too pulled around by every different perspective, to quick to accept the 'gist' of something.

A good analogy of Ne vs Ni would be Einstein (Ne) and Hawking (Ni). Einstein used an inductive perception of the nature of things to consider a new, broad idea of the universe. Having done that, he spent the rest of his life attempting to stretch that theory further, wider, greater, broader. Hawking, instead, sought to consolidate... to backfill our idea of the universe until it was rich, thorough and complete.

It could be said that Ni seeks the the deepest truth, where Ne seeks the broadest one.
 
E
#13 ·
I always thought Ni was universal though, in that whatever truth is found encompasses the totality of the universe itself, whereas Ne is situated in the universe, Ni is dislocated, broader, grander. Sometimes I can see flashes of the entirety of the universe unfold in front of my eyes. I see its inception and its death at the same time, just like I see the tiniest portion and the total vast size at the same time.

So I don't understand when you say Ne seeks the universal lol. I never did. How can it be universal when Ne still insists there's some form of shape it must bend? Take the example of the box. Ne types often claim that thinking outside the box is what Ne is, but the thing is, to me as an Ni type, it assumes there is a box there, a limit, an object, some foundation itself. What if there is no box? No rules, no laws, no boundaries? Ne must necessarily assume there is an object there first for it to operate. Then how can it be thinking outside the box if it still operates with the logic that there is a box? I don't see a box or think of boxes when I think of Ni. I think beyond boxes. Boxes are irrelevant. The shape of the object is irrelevant.

Anyway, I'm not trying to make it into some Ne vs Ni debate. Just felt like putting it out there because I never understood why Ne types tend to think of Ne as big picture etc, because to me it seems so limited at some level, and I don't mean that in an offensive way. I just don't understand, lol.
 
#11 ·
Ni is a largely subconscious perceptive function; alone, I'd argue that it doesn't really present itself in an overt manner (spacing out, dreaminess, contemplative demeanor, more relaxed, etc aside). It is a process which runs in the background, being fed information by Se (largely subconsciously) and piecing it together tirelessly. This is how we Ni-doms can arrive at conclusions without actually knowing how they came about, or from where the information we have gleaned was derived.

Speaking from personal experiences, Ni-zone outs occasionally take me so deep that reality somehow unfurls before me; for a fleeting moment, I see the world devoid of any subjective filters (personal or collective). I see the shade of gray, objective reality. It's as though I suddenly feel a oneness with the Universe, understanding it far greater than I had previously... then I come crashing back to 'reality'.

Contrary to the stereotypical descriptions, I do not concern myself chiefly with symbolism. Certainly, it intrigues me and I find it fascinating. I'm hardly the walking encyclopedia for the topic some descriptions would have you believe, though. For myself, it's more about entertaining thoughts of what isn't there, rather than what is. My mind is focused on potentialities rather than actualities; physical reality is of very little interest to me, and my mind encourages me to break free of its chains.

So, if you're an Ni user you may have experienced some of the above, or perhaps identify with what I have said.

If Ni isn't dominant (a perfect example being my ENFJ fiancee) you're far more likely to appear less reflective, and also (again, in my experience) have a greater 'bounciness' to you energy-wise. My ENFJs Ni only really reveals itself when she wishes to discuss a 'deep' topic. Quite often I'm amazed at her depth and complexity. On the surface, she's fun, energetic and extremely warm. Just beneath that exterior she's wise, intelligent and deep. Oh my is she deep... you'd never know it, though!

On the other side, I appear somewhat cold, aloof and generally removed. You have to engage my Fe to get me to warm up. In other words, we share the same functions but there is a noticeable difference between how NiFe and FeNi present themselves. I would assume the same can be said for NiTe and TeNi.
 
C
#30 ·
pmj85 said:
Speaking from personal experiences, Ni-zone outs occasionally take me so deep that reality somehow unfurls before me; for a fleeting moment, I see the world devoid of any subjective filters (personal or collective). I see the shade of gray, objective reality. It's as though I suddenly feel a oneness with the Universe, understanding it far greater than I had previously... then I come crashing back to 'reality'.
Click to expand...
I thought I was the only person who experienced this, haha. It usually happens after I've had a good day where I was able to be surprisingly carefree and "let go" a little bit, engaging my Se. I'll be sitting in a car, staring out the window, exhausted, and suddenly it's like my consciousness freezes as the rest of the world goes on, giving me this inexplicable feeling of contradicting wholeness and separateness, and I just have to tell myself "this is real right now" to pull myself back, if that makes sense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pmj85
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#12 ·
Btw OP, if you are confused about Ti vs Ni, maybe we can try analyzing things from another perspective.
Instead of comparing INTP Ti with INTJ Ni, you can try comparing INTP Ne with INTJ Ni instead.
Both Ne and Ni are about seeing possibilities but Ni will narrow down these possibilities whereas Ne will multiply these possibilities.

This is how a conversation between an Ni and a Ne user is like:


Ni: Should we go to the supermarket to buy some groceries?
Ne: What groceries are we buying?
Ni: Eggs and a loaf of bread
Ne: Just eggs and a loaf of bread? What about other things like drinks?
Ni: No, we don't need to buy other things.
Ne: *starts suggesting more possibilities* Oh, I just forget, we have run out of tissue papers. Should we go buy tissue papers as well?
Ni: *starts getting irritated* I said NO! Which part of no don't you get it?!
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
F
#16 · (Edited)
WinterFox said:
Ni: Should we go to the supermarket to buy some groceries?
Ne: What groceries are we buying?
Ni: Eggs and a loaf of bread
Ne: Just eggs and a loaf of bread? What about other things like drinks?
Ni: No, we don't need to buy other things.
Ne: *starts suggesting more possibilities* Oh, I just forget, we have run out of tissue papers. Should we go buy tissue papers as well?
Ni: *starts getting irritated* I said NO! Which part of no don't you get it?!
Click to expand...
Yeah, that's when that happens. I actually just had this conversation now and I got kind of annoyed (but I think it's more of an impatience thing rather than me using Ni):

(BG: I gave a list of things to buy, and among those things were "Cool Grey 1, 3, 5" and "Warm Grey 1, 3, 5.")
Person: The shop said they didn't have those colours. They have 11 for both, though.
Me: (She interrupted me while I was doing something important, so I got annoyed.) Why are you telling me this? I don't need to know what else they have. I gave you a list for a reason.

Or when someone does grocery shopping and they say that they'd "only get some" things. Then while inside the grocery the person keeps going "Oh, we need this, too. Oh, and that. We also ran out of butter, let's go get some." At the end, we have twice as much grocery bags than originally planned. I get annoyed because the only reason I agreed to go was that I believed and was assured that it would only take a short amount of time.

I think I'm just generally impatient.

ephemereality said:
I lean entp.

Ni is not about analogy but symbolism. It's different. If I say my heart hurts because there's a thorn in my chest that's ni in very simple and concrete terms. It's not that it describes something but what is represented. How the thorn symbolizes the pain, the depth and severity. Though I don't think you'll understand because ne blocks out this kind of logic of viewing the world.
Click to expand...
Interesting... I've never been typed as ENTP before. I've always just looked at INTP and INTJ because that's all I ever got in my life, and while I was unsure of my being NT, I was very sure that I was an Ixxx.

I've read from careerplanner and a few other people that, for introverted users who are not very aware of the functions, the auxiliary appears more dominant because it is the extraverted process. Is the introvert the only one "blind" to their dominant introverted function, or do the "outsiders" also see what is the most extraverted function?

Also, by going with your example of Ni, would it be possible to "use" it if certain situations call for it? Like, say, when you're writing? Or is another function involved in creative writing? (I'm going just by the "literary" or the "poetic" manifestation, though.)

Sorry for the numerous questions.
 
S
#14 ·
Socionics describes Ne as "intuition of possibilities" and Ni as "Intuition of time" I think that's a much easier way to think about it than by the pseudo-depth-masturbation a lot of people engage in when talking about Ni.
 
#40 ·
Scelerat said:
Socionics describes Ne as "intuition of possibilities" and Ni as "Intuition of time" I think that's a much easier way to think about it than by the pseudo-depth-masturbation a lot of people engage in when talking about Ni.
Click to expand...
This is rather intriguing.

Could you provide some context into how they describe this? A brief summary maybe? A link, even?
 
P
#18 ·
FluffySheep said:
I've been recently identified as an INTJ because of my high Fi (in relation to my measly Fe) and Te, and how I've been told that I experience Ni-Fi loops (I've read the "Recognizing the Inferior Function" threads on INTP and INTJ).

Something just doesn't settle with me, though: I don't feel like I have Ni, but how can I be an INTJ without having the function that significantly makes an INTJ an INTJ? I don't have ground-breaking "insights" or "Eureka!" moments that a lot of people are referring to. Maybe I just don't have enough information, or my brain just doesn't think/process information that way. I feel like I don't use Ni (or if I have, I don't remember/recognise it at all).

The only explanation that I found that I could relate to (the bolded one) was IonOfAeons' description in the "Ni: Just what the hell is it? XD" thread.



Since I don't yet fully grasp the concept of Ni, I don't know how accurate his explanation is. Also, I may have only used certain functions a few times; I don't think I'd qualify to be a Ni-dom if I've only used it a few times in my life (assuming that this explanation is true). I don't think just "predicting" situations is enough to justify being a Ni-dom.

Examples:

A lot of people can predict things/scenes in movies (well, mainly because they're predictable), but it doesn't mean that they're Ni-dom.

Late November a Burger King was being constructed near us, and all the banner said "Opening December 2013." I said "Psh, yeah—December 31."

(While these may be called "predictions," I don't really see how only Ni-doms or Ni-strong types think of them. With just a vague "Opening December 2013," of course BK will open on Dec. 31—they'd say "Well, technically we did open during December.")

I've read the descriptions from careerplanner, cognitiveprocesses[dot]com, keys2cognition, oddlydevelopedtypes (plus some others I can't remember) and these threads (since I can't post links yet):

Is an insight from Ti or Ni?
Ni: Just what the hell is it? XD
Introverted Intuition (Ni): Your Experience As An INTJ
Ti vs. Ni
Ni instead of Ne
The Ti vs. Ni one with "The Sequel" in the title (However, after a reading the first posts, it doesn't look like it would have any new information, so I didn't finish it.)

I forgot the others.

Could it be possible to be totally unaware that you've been using Ni? If so, how do you become aware of it? (I have a feeling that someone would say something with the main idea/point as "You just do," but still—there may be others.)

How would a Ni-dominant person differ from a person who only occasionally uses Ni?

Edit: I realised just now that my thread title was poorly phrased and I omitted some parts that should've gone in between. :/ Hopefully the idea is still intact...
Click to expand...
High Fi,.. not aware of Ni,.... Te still important,..... questioning your type,.... you seem to "feel" a lot, and you chose as your nick name: FluffySheep.

My Ni looks at all this and goes like: Not an INTJ!

Have you considered you´re another type? INFP's tend to do what you´re doing now and INFP's tend to like the INTJ type. Not saying you are an INFP, but consider it a possibility to investigate.
 
F
#19 ·
To be honest I thought of me being an xxFx only in passing because no one has ever typed me that way. I just narrowed it down to the two types that people have always identified me as. I'll look into it and see if it applies to me more.

What do you mean by me seeming to "feel a lot"? Perhaps (a) specific line/s that made you think of it so that I would know how it manifests; I've always believed that Fe was more on "feeling about/for other people" (such as taking into account their emotions, feelings, etc.), and Fi was more on measuring things based on one's values/emotions/etc. Maybe that's why I overlooked Fe.
 
#24 ·
@ephemereality, if I might make some suggestions. Because I think you had some really cool observations about the difference between Ne and Ni. And being a dominant Ne-user, I can't help but contribute. ^_^

Ne versus Ni is a topic that keeps on coming up. You keep hearing stuff like Ni is "narrower" and "deeper" and Ne is "broader" and "shallow". You know, depth versus breadth. Or one is divergent thinking, the other is convergent thinking. All these various ways of explaining the difference don't seem to help things much. They just add to the mystery.

The "thinking outside of the box" example also doesn't work. To me, I question the very existence of the box anyways. There is no box. Just endless possibilities.

Of course, everybody looks at that box and sees it as something different. I'm pretty sure we all like to imagine we think outside the box. I'm convinced now it's just a matter of perspective.

When you thought of the box, you defined it as the external world, didn't you? You're Introverted. That makes sense. Perhaps to me, the box is my subjective impression of things.

You brought up a very cool point:

I always thought Ni was universal though, in that whatever truth is found encompasses the totality of the universe itself, whereas Ne is situated in the universe, Ni is dislocated, broader, grander. Sometimes I can see flashes of the entirety of the universe unfold in front of my eyes. I see its inception and its death at the same time, just like I see the tiniest portion and the total vast size at the same time.

So I don't understand when you say Ne seeks the universal lol. I never did. How can it be universal when Ne still insists there's some form of shape it must bend? Take the example of the box. Ne types often claim that thinking outside the box is what Ne is, but the thing is, to me as an Ni type, it assumes there is a box there, a limit, an object, some foundation itself. What if there is no box? No rules, no laws, no boundaries? Ne must necessarily assume there is an object there first for it to operate. Then how can it be thinking outside the box if it still operates with the logic that there is a box? I don't see a box or think of boxes when I think of Ni. I think beyond boxes. Boxes are irrelevant. The shape of the object is irrelevant.
Click to expand...
I think the same way. I think the best way to understand Ne and Ni is to see how they work with Sensation. So Ni-Se and Ne-Si.

As an Ni-user, you perceive what is (Se), and then you look behind what is. You are concerned, not with external possibilities, but with what the external object has released within you. (Your subjective impression of What Could Be?) At least, that's how Jung put it.

I really don't understand that way of thinking. I mean, I can sort of grasp the essence of it. But I do not truly understand. My Extroverted Brain fails to compute. ^^' Although I'm sure my manner of thinking is just as foreign. I care only about the object. That is where my focus goes. The potential that the object holds. I walk in a city and I will wonder about it, about the people walking around -- who are they? Where are they going? Who are they truly? And what about the potential of the city itself?

A Ni-dom, on the other hand, would be less object focused. I imagined it like this one time: You might look at a person and think for whatever reason, "I see all of beauty here..." and connect this concept to other things.

Ne is this explosion of possibilities, and the origin is the object. Ni is a web, this beautiful internal map of ideas which stem from the undercurrents behind What Is.

Both Ne and Ni are chained to different things. They are constrained by their attitude to the object. Ne's world is the external world. Ne focuses on objects. All objects are affected by movement and time and change. Therefore Ne is restrained by those things as well. If you think about it, Ne is always observing the effects Time has had on objects. Ne is never looking at Time as a whole. Just the effects of Time.

Ni, though -- its focus is not dependent on time or change or movement. Because their focus is not on objects which are so affected by these things. This is why Ni seems so much more "timeless".

I was conversing with somebody about this on a thread a while ago:

Hmm... one time I read something which said Intuition had a lot to do with your perception of time, or something like that. I was recently thinking how ever different type would experience and perceive time, and how they orient themselves to it. The more I think about it, it does make sense that Ni would be "timeless". Ne focuses on objects, all of which are in "motion" (not always in the physical sense but it always seems like for whatever law applies to the physical world, the same or a similar "law" seems to apply to the non-physical world [if that even makes sense]), so Ne is focusing on the effects of time by observing objects. But Ni, which looks past objects and doesn't really care about that, does not focus on something in "motion". It definitely doesn't have the sense of time like Ne does. It makes sense that because of its focus, the Ni-dom would find themselves feeling very disconnected to the many things changing around them. O_O It's as if Ni just usually focuses on time as a whole, or something like that.
Click to expand...
Anyways. This subject has always fascinated me. Ni is my shadow. It's a mystery to me. I doubt I'll ever fully understand it. But I love to think about it. I love to think about what potential Ni has. Oh, what Ne can do with the concept of Ni. ^_^
 
D
#25 ·
@FluffySheep - I can relate to all that you said in your first post. Like you, I didn't think this whole "predicting" events could be Ni. It wasn't enough to make up a function. It seems Ni is a very abstract function and thus difficult to describe. I had to research quite a bit until I could get a better understanding of it myself :p
I'm going to link you to some threads that were really helpful for me and hope they do the same for you!

Si vs Ni
Description of INTJ
Another INTJ Description

The last two are useful because they describe Ni for the INTJ, therefore Ni-Te.
 
E
#26 ·
This is my description of INTJ or ILI, and thus far, every INTJ I've shown it to finds it accurate. Things click at a level other descriptions don't and can't do:

ILIs operate with Ni base, making them naturally attuned to detecting hidden trends, meanings and patterns in the world around them. With intuition being introverted, the ILI is capable of reviewing long-term patterns from the past and making predictions into the present and future. This is because Ni operates similarly to Si, in that Ni needs to build models of the world by reviewing data over longer time periods. This differs to Ne base found in ILEs and IEEs who are attuned to possibilities in the present.

Introverted intuition could be best described as finding purpose and meaning beyond what can be immediately experienced that links to greater universal but fundamental truths of how the world functions. Someone with base Ni would for instance look at a clock but what they see and experience is not the clock itself but how the clock is representative of the concept of time. Further examination of the clock and the concept of time could lead to the search for greater and deeper universal truths such as how time controls the concepts of life and death and the apparent cyclical nature of the universe itself.

Ni being a perceptive function allows for information to be stored, reviewed and distilled over time into grander, universal concepts. It is this distillation process of information that allows the ILI to make predictions into the future, and it is this distillation that associates Ni with time. By time one ought to not confuse Ni with the concept of time itself either as a standard of measurement or how we understand change and movement in the physical world, but by how Ni detects and connects to universal patterns in the sense-world. It is therefore more accurate to say that Ni is timeless -- it exists outside the detected space-time continuum. It is thus this ethereal existence that allows the Ni base type to connect to time, and one can argue that Ni is capable of seeing through time itself due to its ability to detect universal concepts and patterns that are true regardless of context specifics. An example of such pattern is that one must first be born in order to be considered a living being.

It is not always easy or possible for the Ni base type to express his or her conceptual understandings of the world due to Ni’s introverted nature. There are several reasons for this. Firstly, introverts have a greater difficulty in general to communicate with the external world due to the how their information metabolism operates. Communication with the external world relies on the acceptance of general principles. These general principles are different to the universal concepts Ni is attuned to, and expression of the universal requires the ILI to find matching external general and logical principles in order to convey the Ni visions properly.

Secondly, being of the IP temperament, the ILI tends to prefer observation over judgement. This is due to the nature of irrationality itself leading the ILI to mostly being attuned to perception data. Sorting through this data requires the active use of a judgement function, making it sometimes seem as if the ILI has troubles coming to conclusions or making decisions. Because Ni operates on detecting patterns over longer time-periods, it is possible for the ILI to find it difficult to sometimes come to definitive conclusions about the state of the world. The ILI may experience a sense of uncertainty in trusting his or her own judgements, feeling that unless a definite pattern has been formed, it is very difficult if nigh impossible to tell the true outcome of things. This could to the outsider look like unnecessary passive observation and as if the ILI does not fully know what it is he or she wants or desires and an extroverted judgement type might even experience the ILI as aimless or without a definite goal. To the eyes of the outsider, it is thus easy to mistake the ILI as a recluse who tends to drift through the world without any apparent purpose or larger life goal, predominantly defined by his or her inertia and inability to create action in the present moment even though the ILI deep down seeks a way to engage with the world in an active, rather than passive, manner.

However, to the ILI, such goals and purposes are impossible to attain without first feeling that he or she fully knows and understands what is to come due to the ILI always being guided by his or her Ni visions. Instead, decisions of importance tend to coalesce over time, resulting in a drive or move that is experienced as inevitable. As such the true nature of the irrational temperament can be observed as outsiders might wonder why the sudden movement or need for action that seems to come out of nowhere, being unaware that this spur of action has in fact been a long on-going, internal process for the ILI.

Thirdly, leading with introverted intuition means complete psychological rejection of the sense-world. All energy is focused inward, constantly distilling whatever vision the Ni base type happened to be interested in at any given moment. Intuition, working by detecting archetypal hidden meanings, is naturally difficult to explain or convey because it does not work with what is tangible, concrete and can be directly observed or experienced. This might lead to the impression that ILIs predominantly “live in their own heads” in that not only do they seem to lack interest in the world around them, but the esoteric nature of intuition might be entirely lost upon those who lack this natural ability to connect and detect hidden meanings and patterns in the sense-world. The end result might be that the Ni base type is experienced as unrealistic, unpragmatic or simply not seen as making much sense in conversation. It is therefore easy to see why the Ni base type requires the use of an extroverted judging function to be able to fully express and realize their visions in the present world.
 
A
#43 · (Edited)
has the argument been presented that neither Ni nor Ne is the OP's dominant function? other than Introverted Thinking, which was mentioned before. he seems incredibly curious, which obviously isn't linked to any specific function, but also unsure. I wonder if you, Fluffy, yet grasp at least a somewhat comprehensive idea of what each function is. I'd hate to be redundant and just restate what others have but...

please scrutinize me if I misrepresent the functions....

Ne-doms are constantly immersed in world of potential scenarios and possibilities. they postulate "what if?" about people, concepts, places, the nature of things, etc. all the goddamn time. they make guesses and when unchecked, can believe incorrect things about people, concepts, the nature of things, etc., because they guessed their way there, forgetting to then contextualize that possibility to reality. they have, in a sense, one foot in any given theoretically possible scenario at any given time.

Ni-doms are immersed in a world of symbolism, mysticism, and deep introspective nonverbal understandings. they assess the meaning and true character of things and people, not necessarily through logic, but by intuiting it. when unchecked and without grounded Se, they can get lost in a misty introverted haze outside of the reality they aren't wholly perceiving. they have one foot in an inner mind of symbolic nature.

Ti-doms are consumed by a curiosity to understand the mechanisms of a specific thing to the fullest capacity. these usually include non-personal things like theoretical concepts and mechanics. pure Ti is often the full breakdown diagnostic understanding of something. it analyzes and pulls apart the mechanisms of a thing in order to comprehend it. when unchecked or rather ill-founded, it can lead to complete misunderstandings of the ways in which things operate. Ti doms have one foot in their heads as they try to pick and part and analyze everything about a specific thing they can.
 
F
#45 · (Edited)
Agg Herbor said:
I wonder if you, Fluffy, yet grasp at least a somewhat comprehensive idea of what each function is.
Click to expand...
I don't think so because I believe that my understanding of each function will never be comprehensive unless I can somehow know how each function manifests or looks like when it's used. I've read a number of descriptions and gathered the common points, but it's like I only know the "words" that describe the functions (if that made any sense) and I have a hard time actually separating/identifying what a function "looks" like when someone uses it. I'm not sure if it's because of a lack of experience due to lack of knowledge, a lack of knowledge due to a lack of experience, or something else entirely.

(This is a bit off-topic, but it may be brought out later.) I found Ni to be the most complicated/difficult to understand, so I decided to just ask about Ni rather than every function.
 
Z
#44 ·
So, let's make an example to make sure that I understood Ni.

Let's say Shawn had a bad experience with Jeff. This experience is stored now in Ni and here imagine with me.
*A blackhole absorb every information, current and past* (Imagine it like it moves)
Shawn still didn't understand what was the problem with Jeff. Jeff changed after they met a girl.
Shawn understood later and stored Jeff as Model A.
As time passes Shawn met Gregory, Gregory had two friends, male and female. This time, Shawn is an observer.
However, when Shawn saw Gregory friends, he realized that there relationship will end.
Shawn took information from his observation of both the male and female friend. He told Gregory
That his relationship won't last with the male friend. Gregory took Shawn words as something stupid or maybe Shawn is crazy.
Shawn here said to Gregory, You will understand that later. Gregory said "I believe in my friends!!!"
Shawn : Hmph...how stupid.

So, in conclusion, Ni absorb information and connect it without caring about timeline then predict what might happen.
It fills the present to predict the future.
Te : Break it part in logical form. So, it appears to INTJ that this is a logical conclusion.
Fe : No info.

Correct me if I was wrong.
 
Personality Cafe
posts
11M
members
172K
Since
2008
A forum community dedicated to all ranges of personality types and people. Come join the discussion about health, behavior, care, testing, personality types, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Explore Our Forums
INFP Forum - The Idealists INFJ Forum - The Protectors INTP Forum - The Thinkers INTJ Forum - The Scientists Myers Briggs Forum