Personality Cafe banner

1 - 20 of 60 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,331 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
Hi.

I'm going to expand slightly upon an example I used in an earlier post on Ni - the smokescreen.

This example is helping people understand the perception functions in some Facebook groups - well-received so far, so here goes.

Imagine you're looking at a picture, and the entire thing is covered by a thick screen of smoke.

Ni.

As the smoke shifts and moves, you catch a couple of glimpses of what lies beneath.

Through Se, Ni picks up on all the spots it can see through, and fills in the rest of the image by asking itself what this information means, how is it all connected to each other and ultimately - what is behind the smokescreen.

Whether this image is accurate to what truly lies beneath the smokescreen, the Ni user will probably never know.

They are comfortable accepting the image created in their head, as the information they will receive.

This image, is their reality - and in a sense, they bypass the smokescreen.

Se.

As the smoke shifts and mov-*blows the smoke away to reveal entire image*.

Unlike Ni, Se isn't comfortable relying on simply guessing at what lies beneath the smoke.

Se types will prefer to remove the smoke, and expose the image for what it actually is, in reality.

The way in which they do this is by gathering more and more information - asking questions - clearing the smoke, by fleshing out the big picture.

Se types actively seek to understand the big picture, to clear the smoke.

Si.

As the smoke shifts and moves, the Si type zooms in on one section they can see through - what is this?

They explore within themselves the multiple possibilities that this singular piece of information might present - could this piece be the ocean? Could it be a pool? Could it be the sky?

In order to figure this out, the Si type - without realising it - is comparing what they're seeing, to what they know - this blue is too dark to be the sky.. it's too dark to be a pool as well, never seen one like that.. it must be the ocean..

In doing this, Si types lift that section and surrounding sections of the image through the smokescreen to get a clearer image.

They search within themselves, for the answers they seek - relying on impressions they get, similarities, differences, vibes etc - in order to better understand what they're seeing.

Si would then repeat the process with the next bit of information they zoom in on, the next section they see through the smoke - and knowing what they already know about the previous piece of information, they are better equipped to identify what the next section is and pull it out of the smoke - eventually, through introspection and observing their own impressions, Si types will lift the entire picture through the smokescreen and see the whole thing for what it is - and, more than that, they will understand what each piece is, what it means to them, and how it fits into the big picture as a whole.

Ne.

As the smoke shifts and moves, the Ne type zooms in on one piece they can see through - what could this be?

Blue.. water, ocean? Pool? Sky? All of the above?

They will then put all of this information together, as perhaps a pool in the sky, or one of those cordoned off swimming pools that are actually part of the beach.

The Ne type is comfortable with this. They don't need to flesh out the big picture from here.
They think they already know it - from this one piece of information, they explore numerous possibilities and create one, or more, most likely scenarios - "something like that, anyway" is good enough for Ne.

Ne has "the gist" of it and that's as far deep as Ne needs to, or wants, to go.

Ne may/may not decide to look for another gap in the smokescreen, and if they do, they'll apply the same thing to that - yellow, probably the sun or sand? Picture would have to be upside down for that, lol. Picasso? Sandy sun? Is it the horizon? Low tide?

Notice how they've already moved on from the fact the last picture clearly has water.

At some point they will connect them altogether and see the image for what it is, if they really try - but what is actually behind the smokescreen isn't what's important to Ne - it's what could be behind the smokescreen that's important and theorising about this, is what gets Ne rock hard.

Actually finding out, for real, what the image is kills the fun and excitement for Ne.
Novelty is gone. Ne moves on.

This is a direct clash with Se, in which the information only becomes useful once the smoke has been cleared, so to speak.

--


Thoughts?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
123 Posts
While this is not an opposition to what you wrote, and maybe to rephrase it a bit, I don't think Ni cares about the smokescreen or what's behind it at all. Ni cares about totality of the scene and its meaning. Tries to get at that by sending a query down the personal and collective unconscious and gets a response immediately, also not concerned if it is accurate or not. Pure Ni without any other interference works like this in my estimation.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,331 Posts
Discussion Starter #3 (Edited)
While this is not an opposition to what you wrote, and maybe to rephrase it a bit, I don't think Ni cares about the smokescreen or what's behind it at all. Ni cares about totality of the scene and its meaning. Tries to get at that by sending a query down the personal and collective unconscious and gets a response immediately, also not concerned if it is accurate or not. Pure Ni without any other interference works like this in my estimation.
In what way does this differ from what I said?

EDIT: Added something similar in - key part of the process I left out - I implied it, but I do want it included in text, as well.
Cheers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
648 Posts
While this is not an opposition to what you wrote, and maybe to rephrase it a bit, I don't think Ni cares about the smokescreen or what's behind it at all. Ni cares about totality of the scene and its meaning. Tries to get at that by sending a query down the personal and collective unconscious and gets a response immediately, also not concerned if it is accurate or not. Pure Ni without any other interference works like this in my estimation.
I’m confused by this. So in this situation you’re saying Ni is ignoring the screen and the painting and asking “Why are we here in the first place and what is the meaning of this?”
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,331 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
I’m confused by this. So in this situation you’re saying Ni is ignoring the screen and the painting and asking “Why are we here in the first place and what is the meaning of this?”
I think he misread what "the scene" is, in a literal sort of "I'm looking at a jigsaw puzzle" kind of way, and is trying to get at how "deep" and "meaningful" Ni is, in that it doesn't care about the "scene" or what's behind the smokescreen, because there's more to the whole picture.. not comprehending the idea of the "scene" as being a totality in and of itself.

i.e not recognising the scene and smokescreen is a metaphor for the way the functions perceive information and unearth the whole picture.

I think he took it way more literal than intended, missing the point - but he did suggest something I implied and have now edited in more concretely, so that was handy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,182 Posts
Si.

As the smoke shifts and moves, the Si type zooms in on one section they can see through - what is this?

They explore within themselves the multiple possibilities that this singular piece of information might present - could this piece be the ocean? Could it be a pool? Could it be the sky?

In order to figure this out, the Si type - without realising it - is comparing what they're seeing, to what they know - this blue is too dark to be the sky.. it's too dark to be a pool as well, never seen one like that.. it must be the ocean..

In doing this, Si types lift that section and surrounding sections of the image through the smokescreen to get a clearer image.

They search within themselves, for the answers they seek - relying on impressions they get, similarities, differences, vibes etc - in order to better understand what they're seeing.

Si would then repeat the process with the next bit of information they zoom in on, the next section they see through the smoke - and knowing what they already know about the previous piece of information, they are better equipped to identify what the next section is and pull it out of the smoke - eventually, through introspection and observing their own impressions, Si types will lift the entire picture through the smokescreen and see the whole thing for what it is - and, more than that, they will understand what each piece is, what it means to them, and how it fits into the big picture as a whole.
Extraordinarily accurate description of how the process works for me. In particular, the part about how identifying the first element... any element... provides an "anchor point" from which finding additional elements becomes much easier. Prior to finding that first element, there can be a great sense of disorientation. Also quite accurate is how the process will continue until all of the elements are identified and the big picture emerges... not JUST the big picture, but a thorough and detailed understanding of the framework needed to create and sustain that big picture.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,331 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Extraordinarily accurate description of how the process works for me. In particular, the part about how identifying the first element... any element... provides an "anchor point" from which finding additional elements becomes much easier. Prior to finding that first element, there can be a great sense of disorientation. Also quite accurate is how the process will continue until all of the elements are identified and the big picture emerges... not JUST the big picture, but a thorough and detailed understanding of the framework needed to create and sustain that big picture.
Awesome, this is great to hear - and yeah, I wanted the big picture 'emerging' to be how people visualised the process I had in my head - because for whatever reason, that's how I see Si.

I don't see Si as 'clearing the smoke' like Se, and I don't see it as bypassing the smoke like Ni does - I see it as kind of like when they pull up old ships etc out of the ocean - I see Si as hooking up a big ol' crane to a piece of information, and pulling it up through the smoke/out of the water.

I view it this way, because I see Si as being interested in more than the singular piece of information on the surface level - i.e pulling up a part of a ship out of the water lets you inspect the rest of the wreckage you pulled up - not just the bit you saw on the surface - you can see under the piece, see it from the sides etc, different angles etc, and Si types work with that information to basically put the ship back together - they understand all the parts, the more intricate details that the other perception functions miss, imo.

I'm not sure I'm accurately conveying what's in my head, but I hope you get the idea.

I believe that when an Si type grasps the 'big picture' they're practically an expert on the subject, it's not just a 'gist' or an 'overview' it's a deep understanding of everything that makes the 'big picture' the 'big picture'.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jcal

·
Registered
Joined
·
123 Posts
I’m confused by this. So in this situation you’re saying Ni is ignoring the screen and the painting and asking “Why are we here in the first place and what is the meaning of this?”
Ni doesn't ask. And it doesn't ignore anything. It takes in everything all at once and builds into it only using the person's own psyche. It doesn't just arrive at what it could mean, although it is part of it. It doesn't use what is right in front of it physically, because the only importance of that is that it's just a starting point and it's forgotten as soon as it starts the Ni process anyway.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,331 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
Ni doesn't ask. And it doesn't ignore anything. It takes in everything all at once and builds into it only using the person's own psyche. It doesn't just arrive at what it could mean, although it is part of it. It doesn't use what is right in front of it physically, because the only importance of that is that it's just a starting point and it's forgotten as soon as it starts the Ni process anyway.
Source?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
99 Posts
Maybe it'd be different for an Ne-dom, but speaking just for myself, this is fairly accurate until the last portion. At the end of the day, as much fun as I might have speculating on what the picture might be or playing around with theories about it, I'm gonna want to know what it is and whether or not I was right or wrong or how close I was to either.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
648 Posts
I’m confused by this. So in this situation you’re saying Ni is ignoring the screen and the painting and asking “Why are we here in the first place and what is the meaning of this?”
Ni doesn't ask. And it doesn't ignore anything. It takes in everything all at once and builds into it only using the person's own psyche. It doesn't just arrive at what it could mean, although it is part of it. It doesn't use what is right in front of it physically, because the only importance of that is that it's just a starting point and it's forgotten as soon as it starts the Ni process anyway.
I got you so what’s in front of Ni only serves as a launch pad or jumping off point for whatever personal tangent Ni might go off on its own mind. The physical only comes into play as sort of an starters pistol like at the beginning of a horse race and then Ni is going off on its own thing completely away from reality.

So it may see a painting, think of materialism and then dive into symbolic images of materialism and that will lead into another idea or connection like freedom from materialism and conjure up more visuals and then go off until it’s snapped back into reality. Bottom line is it ended up thinking of something that had nothing to do with the painting in the first place
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,331 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
Maybe it'd be different for an Ne-dom, but speaking just for myself, this is fairly accurate until the last portion. At the end of the day, as much fun as I might have speculating on what the picture might be or playing around with theories about it, I'm gonna want to know what it is and whether or not I was right or wrong or how close I was to either.
Yeah, of course - need for closure, right?
Due to being a J dominant.

All of this was written from a 'dominant' perspective, I imagine it'll be a similar story for everyone who leads with a judging function - the need for closure, whether internal or external, will override what I've outlined, to some degree.

As a Ti dom, I imagine you require closure, of sorts, otherwise you're kind of at a loss for what to actually do with the information - i.e, what was the point?

The information, and speculations re: the information isn't actually closure for anyone who leads with a judging function, imo.
I expect this kind of reaction from all Fi, Fe, Ti and Te dominants - something should feel a little off about what I wrote up - and that something is closure.

Fe and Te leading Si or Ni - wants to know what to actually do with the information - this is like, the final step, otherwise it's incomplete.
Fi and Ti leading Se or Ne - wants to know how this information fits into their inner world - how does it make sense? How can I use this information?

This might be a big difference between P and J doms - where P doms are comfortable just ending on the information itself, and the J doms feeling like this isn't 'finished' - wtf do we *do* with the information, now?
Maybe.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,331 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
I got you so what’s in front of Ni only serves as a launch pad or jumping off point for whatever personal tangent Ni might go off on its own mind. The physical only comes into play as sort of an starters pistol like at the beginning of a horse race and then Ni is going off on its own thing completely away from reality.

So it may see a painting, think of materialism and then dive into symbolic images of materialism and that will lead into another idea or connection like freedom from materialism and conjure up more visuals and then go off until it’s snapped back into reality. Bottom line is it ended up thinking of something that had nothing to do with the painting in the first place
I don't think this is accurate, to me this is just boredom.
 

·
Registered
ISTJ
Joined
·
1,557 Posts
Extraordinarily accurate description of how the process works for me. In particular, the part about how identifying the first element... any element... provides an "anchor point" from which finding additional elements becomes much easier. Prior to finding that first element, there can be a great sense of disorientation. Also quite accurate is how the process will continue until all of the elements are identified and the big picture emerges... not JUST the big picture, but a thorough and detailed understanding of the framework needed to create and sustain that big picture.
Agreed. After we find that first anchor point, the rest of the puzzle pieces have a guide that helps them fall into their respective places. "Blue...ocean, sky? Wait, texture looks more like water. Okay ocean. Is that sand? Sun? Okay I haven't seen the entire picture but I'm pretty sure this is a picture of the beach". Something like that...there's not 100% certainty until the entire picture is revealed but we do get a confidence about the probability of it being a beach. ISTJs are always comparing and contrasting things to other related things. We do it very often in order to solve problems.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,182 Posts
Agreed. After we find that first anchor point, the rest of the puzzle pieces have a guide that helps them fall into their respective places. "Blue...ocean, sky? Wait, texture looks more like water. Okay ocean. Is that sand? Sun? Okay I haven't seen the entire picture but I'm pretty sure this is a picture of the beach". Something like that...there's not 100% certainty until the entire picture is revealed but we do get a confidence about the probability of it being a beach. ISTJs are always comparing and contrasting things to other related things. We do it very often in order to solve problems.
The biggest problem we face (at least I do), is that the importance and/or risk-factor of a decision/solution is inversely proportional to the level of trust we're willing to place in our inferior Ne to fill in missing information. With maturity, the threshold of where Ne "guesses" are sufficient to fill in the gaps becomes lower, but it never is something that feels natural/comfortable.
 

·
Registered
ISTJ
Joined
·
1,557 Posts
The biggest problem we face (at least I do), is that the importance and/or risk-factor of a decision/solution is inversely proportional to the level of trust we're willing to place in our inferior Ne to fill in missing information. With maturity, the threshold of where Ne "guesses" are sufficient to fill in the gaps becomes lower, but it never is something that feels natural/comfortable.
I know exactly what you mean. I'm always worried for no reason. It's actually pretty silly. My N peeps are like...how could those things happen? That's ridiculous. Gotta love inferior Ne. When I do try to "let go", it feels so foreign and still worrisome.
 
1 - 20 of 60 Posts
Top