Personality Cafe banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,933 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Ok, I already know about the canned descriptions of secondary Ni online, but tell me in your words what it is and how it plays a role in day-to-day life. How does it work with your Te?

I ask because there's a chance that I may be a slight J...hence, an ENTJ. I usually test as an ENTJ, but I've denied the possibility due to my messiness. So let's see what you've got.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
675 Posts
I like to divide intuition into analysis, synthesis, and synopsis, since it is holistic, apprehending how wholes relate to parts. Ne brings imagination to life, as G.E. says, while Ni is temporally independent, timeless, not connected to points of view. We'll stick with Ni as requested.

Analysis takes a situation, real or imagined, and apprehends the relations between different elements. Let's go with a real-world rather than a philosophical example. Perhaps we're hired by a company. We notice a lot of unforced errors. We notice more people hired quantitatively to fix issues by swarming them, and the issues still don't go away. We notice a very thin layer of management, a lot of young employees with little work or life experience making key decisions, and a tight-fisted man in charge with control issues.

Ni says: This place is run like a Sultanate. One guy in charge, with a lot of submissive servants. It needs to be run like a Kingdom, with layers of nobility, with feedback and information going up the chain. This means firing 10-20 of the peons, and hiring 3-4 experienced, well-paid management guys to coordinate transportation, production, and sales issues. A hint just "pops" into mind that the problem wasn't because more workers were needed, but that it was an epistemic problem of not concentrating knowledge at the right joints of the company's body. Other companies may have the opposite issue-- too much management bloat, and not enough peons performing specialized tasks. Ni just gives an immediate feel into what is the right balance; it sees proportions.

So Ni is a bit different than Ne in that it takes an abstract, timeless point of view, an insight into a situation or event as a general situation or a general event. Ni as synopsis can give a feel for the limits and boundaries of a given problem-space, thus seeing around the corners to find the horizon. Ni allows us to ask Kantian questions such as "how is knowledge possible?" or to reflectively reject such questions as poorly formed or unintelligible. These are the ends of various aspects of human life, not just the means.

Ni gives us a synthetic sense for completeness and incompleteness, a feel for relevance and irrelevance. When are we allowed to say mission accomplished? What is strategic, and what is ancillary? Given a set of factors, how will a situation unfold? Sensation can't help us-- it just recalls more sensation, a database of temporal phenomena-- it puts us at the mercy of memory. If a situation is understood as a situation, then Ni is being used. In learning a new strategy boardgame, there are a few things we want to know right away-- how reinforcements are procured, the probabilities of different combats, the mobility and spacing of the map, the skill level of the opponents, predicting how events will look a few turns out and judging the present in terms of it-- Te can classify and define what factors are necessary based on experience, though only Ni can bring it all together in a realtime situation. The genius of Alexander, for instance, was that he was able to look ahead and see what moves were necessary to consolidate political power, he was able to innovate militarily by using the forces at his disposal in an integrated fashion, and he displayed perfect sense of timing during battle, concentrating the right amount of force at the right point in time. This is not stuff that can be reduced to formula, and Alexander died when he was 33, so it wasn't strictly experience either.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,135 Posts
Ok, I already know about the canned descriptions of secondary Ni online, but tell me in your words what it is and how it plays a role in day-to-day life. How does it work with your Te?

I ask because there's a chance that I may be a slight J...hence, an ENTJ. I usually test as an ENTJ, but I've denied the possibility due to my messiness. So let's see what you've got.
Woah. That's a really bad way of deciding between ENTP and ENTJ.

Te > Ni > Se > Fi ENTJ
Ne > Ti > Fe > Si ENTP

As you can see they're totally different... you should read up your cog funx and compare your Te vs your Ti and your Ne vs your Ni, unless you're already doing that and that's why youre asking this question.

From another thread: "My Ni mostly exists as this sort of thing in my head that tells me "Oi, don't you realise whats going to happen if X?" or that sort of thing where I can sit and stare blankly at a wall for half an hour and just be daydreaming in my head and not realising where the time is going. It doesn't normally manifest itself in innovation. When it does, its rather unconventional. Last year I didn't have a bin, so I took a binbag and put a clothes hanger through each end and hung it on my clothes horse. It was really good; I was quite pleased. In the end I just bought a bin, though."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,933 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
I like to divide intuition into analysis, synthesis, and synopsis, since it is holistic, apprehending how wholes relate to parts. Ne brings imagination to life, as G.E. says, while Ni is temporally independent, timeless, not connected to points of view. We'll stick with Ni as requested.

Analysis takes a situation, real or imagined, and apprehends the relations between different elements. Let's go with a real-world rather than a philosophical example. Perhaps we're hired by a company. We notice a lot of unforced errors. We notice more people hired quantitatively to fix issues by swarming them, and the issues still don't go away. We notice a very thin layer of management, a lot of young employees with little work or life experience making key decisions, and a tight-fisted man in charge with control issues.

Ni says: This place is run like a Sultanate. One guy in charge, with a lot of submissive servants. It needs to be run like a Kingdom, with layers of nobility, with feedback and information going up the chain. This means firing 10-20 of the peons, and hiring 3-4 experienced, well-paid management guys to coordinate transportation, production, and sales issues. A hint just "pops" into mind that the problem wasn't because more workers were needed, but that it was an epistemic problem of not concentrating knowledge at the right joints of the company's body. Other companies may have the opposite issue-- too much management bloat, and not enough peons performing specialized tasks. Ni just gives an immediate feel into what is the right balance; it sees proportions.

So Ni is a bit different than Ne in that it takes an abstract, timeless point of view, an insight into a situation or event as a general situation or a general event. Ni as synopsis can give a feel for the limits and boundaries of a given problem-space, thus seeing around the corners to find the horizon. Ni allows us to ask Kantian questions such as "how is knowledge possible?" or to reflectively reject such questions as poorly formed or unintelligible. These are the ends of various aspects of human life, not just the means.

Ni gives us a synthetic sense for completeness and incompleteness, a feel for relevance and irrelevance. When are we allowed to say mission accomplished? What is strategic, and what is ancillary? Given a set of factors, how will a situation unfold? Sensation can't help us-- it just recalls more sensation, a database of temporal phenomena-- it puts us at the mercy of memory. If a situation is understood as a situation, then Ni is being used. In learning a new strategy boardgame, there are a few things we want to know right away-- how reinforcements are procured, the probabilities of different combats, the mobility and spacing of the map, the skill level of the opponents, predicting how events will look a few turns out and judging the present in terms of it-- Te can classify and define what factors are necessary based on experience, though only Ni can bring it all together in a realtime situation. The genius of Alexander, for instance, was that he was able to look ahead and see what moves were necessary to consolidate political power, he was able to innovate militarily by using the forces at his disposal in an integrated fashion, and he displayed perfect sense of timing during battle, concentrating the right amount of force at the right point in time. This is not stuff that can be reduced to formula, and Alexander died when he was 33, so it wasn't strictly experience either.
Thorough, clear explanation. That really helps to clear things up. Thanks. And in response to both you and the chemical username guy below, it strongly supports the argument that I'm still ENTP. I'm prone to (ab)use my N by connecting specific situations/things to exterior ones to yield innovation or entirely new agendas. Novelty first, optimization second. It sounds like Ni is based more on the balance/optimization/maneuvering of a broader situation, as well as its implications on in the future. And THEN novelty may result, merely as a consequence.

More concisely, as I gather, Ne would be about taking a bunch of external, spontaneous connections and then zooming out to create a new grand scheme.

Whereas Ni would first consider their optimal vision first and THEN consider the connections/seemingly irrelevant things that would influence it. Sort of like reverse order. Makes sense, externally-focused versus internally-focused.

However, it sounds like your description of Ni has a lot of Te weaved in, even after you differentiated it from primary Te. Well, I guess it doesn't matter if it's a description of pure Ni or not, because if I was an ENTJ, it would simply be a description of how my mind works, and it's not.

Guys, correct me if I'm misunderstanding this. I'm just thinking aloud here.

TO DIHYDRACHEMICAL GUY ABOVE ME: I've already compared my Te/Ti, and I use both of those functions extensively (though you might not guess that I use Te much given the lack of organization in my posts LOL)...I definitely use Ne, and yes, I'm now here to weigh my Ni.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
675 Posts
IrukandjiJellyGel: Whereas Ni would first consider their optimal vision first and THEN consider the connections/seemingly irrelevant things that would influence it. Sort of like reverse order.
I like this. Another way to think of it: Ni is centripetal, while Ne is centrifugal.
IrukandjiJellyGel: it sounds like your description of Ni has a lot of Te weaved in
That's true, and as you suspected, deliberate. Ni+Fe would involving connecting with our world, building engaging narratives, bringing different people together as participants, and in the broadest sense-- envisioning who we potentially can be, responding to such a vision as the highest expression of our lives, and finding ourselves transfigured by it. While this might seem a little over a top, watch a little bit of Oprah if you can stomach it and you'll see what I mean. This fits my Analysis/Synthesis/Synopsis division, but in a very different way.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,387 Posts
I think I have a story of how my Ni works. To start with a brief background, I had a college job as a teller for a small-mid sized bank and worked at the office headquarters. The teller stations shared the lobby with the CEO, COO and other top executives of the bank. After a few weeks working there, I knew for a fact that the bank would fall apart and be bought out by another company. Not satisfied with a hunch, I constantly examined everything to prove my suspicion was correct.

The suspicion started when I began studying the CEO. I noticed how infrequent his office visits were and I then began studying his work ethic. He had no work ethic whatsoever. The days he did visit the office, he came in between 10-12am and left well before 4pm. I had a hard time believing he had less work to do then the other executives that spent 8 hours or more at the office. I also eliminated the possibility that he worked from home because that would require technological savvy. He was a 60+ year old man and a terrible typist (yes, I watched him type). Bad typing skills indicate you spend little time behind a computer. Spending little time behind a computer also indicates you accomplish very little at work.

From his work ethic, I then moved on to his personality. My first introduction to his personality was his company vehicle, a Mercedez Benz V12 sedan (I don't know the model because I never cared about those things). Second, a conference room had a painted portrait of his old face on the wall. He loved to be pampered, loved to speak loudly, enjoyed working with "yes" men, and loved having women grovel at his feet. I concluded he was very self centered, and that self centeredness carried forward into his position. At this point it was clear to me that this man valued rewards more than results. A successful CEO values results over rewards.

Since this was a publicly traded company, surely the board of directors could do something! Wrong. He was Chairman of the Board /CEO and this is where the "enjoys working with yes men" part comes in. I went to a stockholder's meeting to further collect evidence. As the CEO gave his presentation, I noticed the interactions between him and the board. His strong personality overpowered them and it was clear that they were led by the nose when he made a decision.

I could go on but I'm getting sleepy. I will also just mention that I navigated my way through HR to have a rotation in the accounting department. Let's just say I was privy to some information that further supported my hunch.

To conclude, a year after I quit, the local newspaper headlined what I predicted 3 years prior. It did occur during the banking crisis but not for the same reasons as other banks. The bank was not involved with mortgage loans but was actually one of the nation's leaders in SBA lending. The bank fell apart because it violated certain lending regulations due to poor internal controls in their loan process. What caused this? Poor management, starting from the top. The FDIC ordered the board of directors to kick out the CEO, the bank fell to shambles, were forced into a buyout and allowed me to say "I knew it".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
241 Posts
I think I have a story of how my Ni works. To start with a brief background, I had a college job as a teller for a small-mid sized bank and worked at the office headquarters. The teller stations shared the lobby with the CEO, COO and other top executives of the bank. After a few weeks working there, I knew for a fact that the bank would fall apart and be bought out by another company. Not satisfied with a hunch, I constantly examined everything to prove my suspicion was correct.

The suspicion started when I began studying the CEO. I noticed how infrequent his office visits were and I then began studying his work ethic. He had no work ethic whatsoever. The days he did visit the office, he came in between 10-12am and left well before 4pm. I had a hard time believing he had less work to do then the other executives that spent 8 hours or more at the office. I also eliminated the possibility that he worked from home because that would require technological savvy. He was a 60+ year old man and a terrible typist (yes, I watched him type). Bad typing skills indicate you spend little time behind a computer. Spending little time behind a computer also indicates you accomplish very little at work.

From his work ethic, I then moved on to his personality. My first introduction to his personality was his company vehicle, a Mercedez Benz V12 sedan (I don't know the model because I never cared about those things). Second, a conference room had a painted portrait of his old face on the wall. He loved to be pampered, loved to speak loudly, enjoyed working with "yes" men, and loved having women grovel at his feet. I concluded he was very self centered, and that self centeredness carried forward into his position. At this point it was clear to me that this man valued rewards more than results. A successful CEO values results over rewards.

Since this was a publicly traded company, surely the board of directors could do something! Wrong. He was Chairman of the Board /CEO and this is where the "enjoys working with yes men" part comes in. I went to a stockholder's meeting to further collect evidence. As the CEO gave his presentation, I noticed the interactions between him and the board. His strong personality overpowered them and it was clear that they were led by the nose when he made a decision.

I could go on but I'm getting sleepy. I will also just mention that I navigated my way through HR to have a rotation in the accounting department. Let's just say I was privy to some information that further supported my hunch.

To conclude, a year after I quit, the local newspaper headlined what I predicted 3 years prior. It did occur during the banking crisis but not for the same reasons as other banks. The bank was not involved with mortgage loans but was actually one of the nation's leaders in SBA lending. The bank fell apart because it violated certain lending regulations due to poor internal controls in their loan process. What caused this? Poor management, starting from the top. The FDIC ordered the board of directors to kick out the CEO, the bank fell to shambles, were forced into a buyout and allowed me to say "I knew it".
This is fascinating! As an INFJ, I'm Ni dominant backed up by Fe...Often times, I've had hunches about things seemingly out of the blue, like knowing someone is pregnant or about to leave their job, before they tell you...but it's a gut feel thing...and I think it comes from listening and observing a lot, but without consciously being aware of it.

I'm trying to really develop my tertiary function tho - Ti - and I don't know exactly how it differs to Te, but I like the idea of following up on my hunches, so that I can back them up with logical factors. That's really cool!

(Otherwise I just sound like a looney...even tho the intuitions are almost always spot on!)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
648 Posts
I blame my Ni for my ability to get into the car and drive without realizing how I even got home. I thank my Se for getting me there alive...that and my excellent driving skills. Basically, I have a serious day dreaming/deep thinking issue.
This made me laugh pretty hard because its the best way I can describe it too.
I had a friend the other day tell me I have a serious day dreaming/deep thinking look on my face all the time.

Ni is really hard to explain.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,849 Posts
Q. I've gotten to know a younger ENTJ and he seems to like debating what to me seem like some very minor points. Is this from underdeveloped Ni? Do ENTJs ever get urges to debate something with someone but then decide against it because it is seemingly a meaningless expansion of energy and time? I know I do this all the time and attribute that to my Ni, but it doesn't seem to work out like this for him at all. He is very talkative and his thought is like a flowing process, and whatever he doesn't agree with he has the habit of immediately voicing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
232 Posts
Q. I've gotten to know a younger ENTJ and he seems to like debating what to me seem like some very minor points. Is this from underdeveloped Ni? Do ENTJs ever get urges to debate something with someone but then decide against it because it is seemingly a meaningless expansion of energy and time? I know I do this all the time and attribute that to my Ni, but it doesn't seem to work out like this for him at all. He is very talkative and his thought is like a flowing process, and whatever he doesn't agree with he has the habit of immediately voicing.
Gotta ask the obvious first...are you sure there is no chance he has a preference for Si and not Ni as an auxiliary function? It would also mean he would have a predisposition for Ne and not Ni in general...Your friend sounds more like my ESTJ friend to be honest.

I don't like to argue details unless I'm being a jerk to prove a point, or if it's particularly pertinent to the subject or project at hand. The ends justify the means; if doing something a certain way makes you happy I don't care, just get it done. I only nitpick if I'm feeling immature that day - people close to me know to just carry on :bored:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
648 Posts
Q. I've gotten to know a younger ENTJ and he seems to like debating what to me seem like some very minor points. Is this from underdeveloped Ni? Do ENTJs ever get urges to debate something with someone but then decide against it because it is seemingly a meaningless expansion of energy and time? I know I do this all the time and attribute that to my Ni, but it doesn't seem to work out like this for him at all. He is very talkative and his thought is like a flowing process, and whatever he doesn't agree with he has the habit of immediately voicing.
Yeah I agree with Knives, I was going to ask to make sure it wasnt a preference of Si over Ni, in which case, the obvious type would be a mistaken ESTJ.

For myself, I dont argue/debate something that is a "seemingly meaningless expansion of energy and time", as you put it so eloquently.
I see no constructive use of debating a minor point that neither party will benefit, or adhere knowledge from.
Maybe some others do, but the point should be fairly important enough that I feel the need to back it up. If the point of the detail is trivial then why bother?
The basis of the argument as a whole is what Im more concerned about.

That must be incredibly annoying Vel.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
675 Posts
I've gotten to know a younger ENTJ and he seems to like debating what to me seem like some very minor points. Is this from underdeveloped Ni? Do ENTJs ever get urges to debate something with someone but then decide against it because it is seemingly a meaningless expansion of energy and time?
This could depend on a variety of factors.

One, men tend to be more relaxed with confrontation than women, will hate on each other for fun, etc. etc. and this transcends personality type.

Next, there may be an NT type factor. Galileo, for example, was known as "the Wrangler" for always starting arguments with people, and he was abrasive and tactless about it too. I've bounced ideas off of other bright people; an argument flows from curiosity about what the other party knows and an interest in how they creatively meet objections. The intellectual stuff NTs consider important usually seems trivial to other types-- consider Swift's lampooning of the Royal Society, or Aristophanes' portrayal of Socrates as a man interested in the anuses of flies.

When is it good to bail on an argument? If it is an argument that escalates, then the argument would be like Heaven, like the famous discussion between Bohr and Einstein, where each made criticisms, and then each party recognized them and stepped up their efforts to meet them. No-- it is good to bail on argument when it stops being an argument-- either all avenues have been exhausted, or one party runs out of ammo and just repeats themselves. It is much better to be in a snotty argument that goes on forever-- more distinctions made, more objections overcome, more premises clarified, more chains of reasoning made explicit-- than a polite quarrel where we learn nothing.

And then again, the person in question may just be quibbling. Quibbling is different than argument in that a person evades the subject of discussion-- it takes the form of argument without arguing about anything. In contrast, quarreling doesn't even look like argument-- yo momma so ugly, she... you get the point.
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top