Personality Cafe banner

1 - 20 of 50 Posts

·
Registered
INFJ
Joined
·
5,863 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
In my opinion, I believe both Ni and Ne (especially Ni) are poorly defined as individual functions, as well as in their differences between each other.
When listening to a reading of Psychological Types, I get the impression that when Jung was describing Intuition, in general, he was meaning imagination. It makes sense, because the opposite of sensory immersion and detailed memory would be imagination. By imagination, I do not limit the definition to creative imaginations such as the ones that produce stories, but any kind of thought process, such as imagery that takes memories and rearranges them in novel ways.
For Ni types, it seems like we use our imaginations in ways that are more disconnected to current external realities. I'll go around daydreaming, thinking of possible replies I might make to previous conversations, how I might create a scene in a novel I'm writing, ideas on pictures/illustrations, etc. They generally have little bearing to the external realities around me.
It would make a great deal of sense if Ne types, when considering their imaginations, would focus them on the external environment. Looking outward and seeing what's there, what's not there, what could be there, etc. People seem to simplify this as "seeing the possibilities", the wording of which I believe is misleading, because Ni's can see possibilities. The difference, likely, being is that we mull over those varied possibilities in a more internal way.

Most cognitive function tests classify me as an ENTP, despite the admittance that my feeling as higher than thinking. It always picks up on Ne tendencies in me, and that's kind of weird. I don't really Ne. If my previous description of Ne is pretty accurate, then I am confident that I don't. I can only consider that it picks up on personality traits and cognitive habits that I've picked up in my efforts to be more aware of my external environment. However, I always feel that disconnect between the external and the internal that these tests don't pick up on, because I see a lot possibilities, and talk about a variety of topics, and can change the subject pretty quickly and easily.
 

·
Registered
ENTJ 7w8 sx/so
Joined
·
5,233 Posts
There aren't a lot of studies on cog functions and the brain. Dario Nardi does have some research with people hooked up to an EEG and found that Ne is essentially different and disparate parts of the brain firing on and off in rapid succession, kind of like blinking Christmas tree lights if you laid out a bunch of different strands of light that turned on and off at different times. As a stark contrast, Nardi discovered that Ni mostly lit up the visual cortex part of the brain along with some activity in the lateral prefrontal cortex as well and would occasionally blink on and off, kind of like a neon sign flashing "Eat at Joe's" or "Drive-thru Open". ;)
 

·
Registered
INFJ
Joined
·
5,863 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
There aren't a lot of studies on cog functions and the brain. Dario Nardi does have some research with people hooked up to an EEG and found that Ne is essentially different and disparate parts of the brain firing on and off in rapid succession, kind of like blinking Christmas tree lights if you laid out a bunch of different strands of light that turned on and off at different times. As a stark contrast, Nardi discovered that Ni mostly lit up the visual cortex part of the brain along with some activity in the lateral prefrontal cortex as well and would occasionally blink on and off, kind of like a neon sign flashing "Eat at Joe's" or "Drive-thru Open". ;)
Lateral prefrontal cortex activity for Ni actually makes a lot of sense. I believe imagination, in general is a lateral prefrontal cortex function.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Scoobyscoob

·
Registered
ENTJ 7w8 sx/so
Joined
·
5,233 Posts
Lateral prefrontal cortex activity for Ni actually makes a lot of sense. I believe imagination, in general is a lateral prefrontal cortex function.
That and when an Ni-user says to "Imagine this..." or "Picture this..." or "Visual with me...", they're essentially asking the person/people they're talking to, to engage their visual cortex and to literally picture what the speaker is talking about.

Ni is the visualization of some concept, desire, future, wish, etc. Then with Je, an NJ goes about fulfilling that visualization.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,331 Posts
The tests are pretty bad, but I think it's because each test creator has differing understandings of all of this.

I mean right down to the foundations, the understandings vary so of course the tests will suck when it comes to picking up nuances etc. Not that ne v ni is all that nuanced it's literally just E vs I. You said Ne and Ni are both poorly defined as functions but this would likely be because they're literally not functions, intuition is the function.

I made a vid on my yt channel (name in sig) covering pretty much this exact topic today if you want to check it out.
 

·
Registered
INFJ
Joined
·
5,863 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
That and when an Ni-user says to "Imagine this..." or "Picture this..." or "Visual with me...", they're essentially asking the person/people they're talking to, to engage their visual cortex and to literally picture what the speaker is talking about.

Ni is the visualization of some concept, desire, future, wish, etc. Then with Je, an NJ goes about fulfilling that visualization.
Ah those intrusive visualizations. If I have a lot on my mind, I have glaring blind spots haha. I find I have a lot of audio information in my imaginations, as well. Generally, I have voices for my characters and can hear them talking when imagining them.

The tests are pretty bad, but I think it's because each test creator has differing understandings of all of this.

I mean right down to the foundations, the understandings vary so of course the tests will suck when it comes to picking up nuances etc. Not that ne v ni is all that nuanced it's literally just E vs I. You said Ne and Ni are both poorly defined as functions but this would likely be because they're literally not functions, intuition is the function.

I made a vid on my yt channel (name in sig) covering pretty much this exact topic today if you want to check it out.
That makes sense. It never really struck me as being very nuanced, and I always figured that it's because, if N is imagination, then it's something that varies more from individual to individual than for E vs I. I think I will check out the vid.
 

·
Registered
ENTJ 7w8 sx/so
Joined
·
5,233 Posts
Ah those intrusive visualizations. If I have a lot on my mind, I have glaring blind spots haha. I find I have a lot of audio information in my imaginations, as well. Generally, I have voices for my characters and can hear them talking when imagining them.


That makes sense. It never really struck me as being very nuanced, and I always figured that it's because, if N is imagination, then it's something that varies more from individual to individual than for E vs I. I think I will check out the vid.
I'm pretty sure an INFJ wouldn't say something like that. As visualizations would hardly be intrusive to an Ni-dom. If you're talking about intrusive thoughts then that's usually due to stress and anxiety than being related to any cognitive function.
 

·
Registered
INFJ
Joined
·
5,863 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
I'm pretty sure an INFJ wouldn't say something like that. As visualizations would hardly be intrusive to an Ni-dom. If you're talking about intrusive thoughts then that's usually due to stress and anxiety than being related to any cognitive function.
Well not intrusive in the sense of uninvited, or that I don't enjoy them, but that they often replace sensory realities in the visual realm. I can see what I imagine more clearly than what I can actually see.
 

·
Registered
ENTJ 7w8 sx/so
Joined
·
5,233 Posts
Well not intrusive in the sense of uninvited, or that I don't enjoy them, but that they often replace sensory realities in the visual realm. I can see what I imagine more clearly than what I can actually see.
lol You still have a long ways to go if this is the level of stuff you're saying about the functions. Ni doesn't false see things. If you're trying to attribute mental illness to a cognitive function then good luck getting anyone who knows anything to help you in any way. There's already way too much bias and bullshit in both MBTI and Neuroscience to bother with people who would use it as a form of character assassination.
 

·
Registered
INFJ
Joined
·
5,863 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
lol You still have a long ways to go if this is the level of stuff you're saying about the functions. Ni doesn't false see things. If you're trying to attribute mental illness to a cognitive function then good luck getting anyone who knows anything to help you in any way. There's already way too much bias and bullshit in both MBTI and Neuroscience to bother with people who would use it as a form of character assassination.
I'm probably just not communicating it clearly. It's hard to describe how I think.
No reason to rude about it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: eeo and attic

·
Registered
ENTJ 7w8 sx/so
Joined
·
5,233 Posts
I'm probably just not communicating it clearly. It's hard to describe how I think.
No reason to rude about it.
I've seen way too many people try to misuse such knowledge. Also, I probably do know what you're talking about but I'd say it'd be best not to until you can communicate it clearly. Talking about matters of the psyche is very unsettling to most people and if you can't communicate it clearly, then most people would rather write you off as being insane. In the literal sense of the word.
 

·
exploring space
ENFP
Joined
·
9,363 Posts
N pays attention to the weaker stimuli turning it into strong whereas S goes with the strong from the start. That's basically what Jung described and is their actual difference in just a few words. It's how N notices "hidden" patterns and connections, because it sees the principles in how two things are alike or not and doesn't focus on the actual object the way S does.

So I think it makes sense that Ns develop our imagination and also use differently. In my experience, Sensors are imaginative for artistic purposes or escapism (healthy or not), whereas Ns use our imagination to also understand the world and learn. That's not to say S never do this but certainly don't rely on it more than direct experience and the stronger the S the bigger the difference.

N in the introverted attitude is focused on what's subjectively important to them primarily, but E and I are attitudes that are both present in people. I experience Ni as well, especially when I get hypochondriac, or sometimes feel otherwise threatened as attention is turned to myself.
 

·
Registered
INTJ
Joined
·
189 Posts
Easy. N assigns meaning to sensory input, makes connections and predictions. Ni uses these hunches within itself, while Ne is a visionary with others.
 

·
Beer Guardian
ENTP 5w6 So/Sx 584 ILE Honorary INTJ
Joined
·
15,889 Posts
In my opinion, I believe both Ni and Ne (especially Ni) are poorly defined as individual functions, as well as in their differences between each other.
When listening to a reading of Psychological Types, I get the impression that when Jung was describing Intuition, in general, he was meaning imagination. It makes sense, because the opposite of sensory immersion and detailed memory would be imagination. By imagination, I do not limit the definition to creative imaginations such as the ones that produce stories, but any kind of thought process, such as imagery that takes memories and rearranges them in novel ways.
For Ni types, it seems like we use our imaginations in ways that are more disconnected to current external realities. I'll go around daydreaming, thinking of possible replies I might make to previous conversations, how I might create a scene in a novel I'm writing, ideas on pictures/illustrations, etc. They generally have little bearing to the external realities around me.
It would make a great deal of sense if Ne types, when considering their imaginations, would focus them on the external environment. Looking outward and seeing what's there, what's not there, what could be there, etc. People seem to simplify this as "seeing the possibilities", the wording of which I believe is misleading, because Ni's can see possibilities. The difference, likely, being is that we mull over those varied possibilities in a more internal way.

Most cognitive function tests classify me as an ENTP, despite the admittance that my feeling as higher than thinking. It always picks up on Ne tendencies in me, and that's kind of weird. I don't really Ne. If my previous description of Ne is pretty accurate, then I am confident that I don't. I can only consider that it picks up on personality traits and cognitive habits that I've picked up in my efforts to be more aware of my external environment. However, I always feel that disconnect between the external and the internal that these tests don't pick up on, because I see a lot possibilities, and talk about a variety of topics, and can change the subject pretty quickly and easily.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,226 Posts
I think the difference between Ni and Ne is depth vs. breadth. With Ni, you can see deeper, but lose the big picture. Since they are perceiving functions, there is no creativity in them because creativity is an expression, and expression is a judgment. iNtuition influences the judging functions since it is an input (raw data). To say that intuition is creative is like saying that seeing is creative, which doesn't make sense. Creativity is more about mastering an art by practice, and how beautiful the art is is determined by how clearly one perceives. The difference between S and N is that one is concrete and the other is abstract. N can see/feel words, numbers, ideas, etc. clearer, but have problems with concrete/material things.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
157 Posts
I think the difference between Ni and Ne is depth vs. breadth. With Ni, you can see deeper, but lose the big picture. Since they are perceiving functions, there is no creativity in them because creativity is an expression, and expression is a judgment. iNtuition influences the judging functions since it is an input (raw data). To say that intuition is creative is like saying that seeing is creative, which doesn't make sense. Creativity is more about mastering an art by practice, and how beautiful the art is is determined by how clearly one perceives. The difference between S and N is that one is concrete and the other is abstract. N can see/feel words, numbers, ideas, etc. clearer, but have problems with concrete/material things.
This is the biggest ever bullshit I've read about any functions since I know type theory.

1.) You don't lose any big picture, because intuition in general is about big picture. You may lose it with Si. But not with a function what is concerned with big picture and not with details.
2.) Intuition is creativeness. You make abstract connections, and make ideas, associations and visions from them. Most of the art is abstract. Because they born from this proccess I described. If this does not describe creativity to you, then you seriously need to rethink yourself. Also, what does that mean that "creativity is an expression"? What if someone is creative and don't express it? They still have the potential for creativeness...or if you don't see something it is non-existent? Then I guess by your standard, nothing exist for example in people mind, because you can't see it.
3.)When you express, you don't neccessarily make judgements. What if I express for example a smile? What am I judge with a smile? It is just an expression.
4.)"Creativity is more about mastering an art by practice" - no. Creativity is what kind of original ideas you have. And as I said, N functions are concerned with ideas. Their entire field are ideas.
this is just plain wrong. If you do something that millions did before you, but you mastered it with practice, you won't be creative. This is not how this term is used at all.

You mix up creating something with being creative very badly. You can create a cake, but if you did it according to a recipe, you won't be creative, not matter how strongly you mastered it.
 

·
The spirit of the spirits
Joined
·
11,026 Posts
There aren't a lot of studies on cog functions and the brain. Dario Nardi does have some research with people hooked up to an EEG and found that Ne is essentially different and disparate parts of the brain firing on and off in rapid succession, kind of like blinking Christmas tree lights if you laid out a bunch of different strands of light that turned on and off at different times. As a stark contrast, Nardi discovered that Ni mostly lit up the visual cortex part of the brain along with some activity in the lateral prefrontal cortex as well and would occasionally blink on and off, kind of like a neon sign flashing "Eat at Joe's" or "Drive-thru Open". ;)
Not to be mean, but Dario Nardi's work is misunderstood. In his book he wrote that all work that he did was the primer for further research. What he did wasn't scientific nor accurate, it was a very rough exploratory research just to understand what things should be researched later. By itself his work doesn't have much scientific value. Therefore nobody knows for sure if what he found out is actually correct or not. He might have been right, but since there isn't any further research done it's just a possibility rather than reality.
 

·
Registered
INTJ
Joined
·
189 Posts
I went to darionardi.com, and the links to his own publishing company and his own Facebook page are Code 404. What does that tell us? He studied under Linda Berens. She is a consultant.

Yoga, shamans, MBTI, counselors, psychiatrists and their pills. Choose your poison. Or just read everything you get your hands on and make up your mind to improve yourself. (Disclaimer for people with mental illness. Seek medical help.)
 

·
Registered
INTJ
Joined
·
189 Posts
It's better to combine Ni + Se and Ne + Si to get some ideas about their differences.

N (both types) takes in sensory facts, but these never stay discrete, i.e. detached from anything. Instead, they are quickly assigned meanings and possibilities.

Ni + Se users make connections and reach conclusions quietly and privately. Then they look outside with Se to confirm what is real. To other people, they will ask, "What's going on?"

Ne + Si users get impressions and brainstorm connections by bouncing them off other people, even experimentally. Then they look inside themselves and think: "How did that go?"
 

·
Registered
ENTJ 7w8 sx/so
Joined
·
5,233 Posts
Not to be mean, but Dario Nardi's work is misunderstood. In his book he wrote that all work that he did was the primer for further research. What he did wasn't scientific nor accurate, it was a very rough exploratory research just to understand what things should be researched later. By itself his work doesn't have much scientific value. Therefore nobody knows for sure if what he found out is actually correct or not. He might have been right, but since there isn't any further research done it's just a possibility rather than reality.
I haven't read any of his books and yes, I'd agree that his work was very exploratory. He is however the very first neuroscientist to actually acknowledge MBTI as having research value so no, you're absolutely wrong about his research having no value as his EEG studies, which are published applied and academic research, does show that functions are seemingly valid. If you're not a scientist, then I guess reading his books might be better for you, but if you do understand the science then getting a hold of a few of his published papers would be much more informative. I guess being intellectually curious is one of the nice things about living in a big city. He did most if not all of his work while at UCLA and I live fairly close to UCLA and can go there and look stuff up if I'd like.

Neuroscientists can and do work with MBTI, although most probably stick with the Big 5 or some other scientifically validated analog to the MBTI while psychologists will either have to reverse their position on MBTI or continue to call it pseudoscience and work their way around the fact that a lot of older psychologists are going to call the MBTI pseudoscience.
 
1 - 20 of 50 Posts
Top