Cognitive Function: Ne vs Ni - Page 3

Cognitive Function: Ne vs Ni

Hello Guest! Sign up to join the discussion below...
Page 3 of 29 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 13 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 284
Thank Tree791Thanks

This is a discussion on Cognitive Function: Ne vs Ni within the Articles forums, part of the Announcements category; Originally Posted by Nobleheart An analogy we like to use around my group of RL friends... If N were superpowers ...

  1. #21

    Quote Originally Posted by Nobleheart View Post
    An analogy we like to use around my group of RL friends...

    If N were superpowers that represented how the mind goes from point A to point B, Ne would be super speed and Ni would be teleportation. Ne is clearly faster than Ni, and yet Ni often gets there first. Ne can move through patterns at blazing speeds narrowing down possibilities until it gets where it needs to go. Ni percolates until it is ready to have an aha moment, and then it just does.

    If Ne and Ni were having a race from the United States to an address in Japan, Ne would be like the Flash, running in the general direction toward Japan, using rapid succession of trial and error until it found the address in what would seem like the blink of an eye... only to find Ni already there. When Ne asks who it got there, Ni has no answer other than it simply did. Meanwhile, Ne can give a detailed account of its course, recounting how it ran a few thousand circles around Ni before the race started. Ni was in one place unmoving as it summoned up the power to make the shift, and then it was suddenly in the right place with little or no recollection of the distance in between.

    I would frequently make my ENTP buddy insane with my inability to explain how I was consistently coming to answers before he could. It made no sense to him because it was so clear that his thinking speed was about ten times mine (I'd wager more than that actually). But, while he was busy with his explosion of possibilities that erupted from any one source, I was scanning the entirety for the one answer.
    Really like your anology, mind if I use it?

  2. #22

    Quote Originally Posted by NeonSyph3 View Post
    Really like your anology, mind if I use it?
    If you use it, I will sue you!

    Hehe, no really, if I didn't want people to use it, I wouldn't have posted it. Enjoy.

  3. #23

    Very nice article! And pretty accurate, I guess. Dominant Ni here.

    I was wondering, perhaps Ni's a function of "clarifying". For example, if I'm given some specific problem, I'm incapable of letting it go until I got it all crystal clear in my mind. This process may take months, years. It's like having a very strong sensibility towards things that seem obscure or not clear. And the idea of cleaning it, like an imperfect stone you have to polish, sometimes look irresistible. I may procrastinate A LOT and not take any decisions about something that's not perfectly understood in my mind, but once it is I won't change my mind.

    However, I'm not sure if this is Ni itself, or the combination Ni + Te.

    But even though there're so many great things about dominant intuition, there's nothing worse than a person with a "out of tune" intuition. People like that start making nonsense connections between things, speak in a very obscure and symbolic way that is only making sense to the person him/herself. And sometimes may even get arrogant ("I knew it" kind of attitude) without being able to recognize they're actually wrong.
    Tsuki, Ross Smith, mirquin and 3 others thanked this post.

  4. Remove Advertisements
    PersonalityCafe.com
    Advertisements
     

  5. #24

    Yes, that certainly sounds like Ni (and I can relate to it). Unlike Ne, Ni works with a few ideas and digs deep, contrary to Ne more wider exploring loads of possibilities. Sometimes I get visions splitseconds before the actual happening, almost like a simulation, does it happen you?

  6. #25

    Quote Originally Posted by Pseudonimum View Post
    Very nice article! And pretty accurate, I guess. Dominant Ni here.

    I was wondering, perhaps Ni's a function of "clarifying". For example, if I'm given some specific problem, I'm incapable of letting it go until I got it all crystal clear in my mind. This process may take months, years. It's like having a very strong sensibility towards things that seem obscure or not clear. And the idea of cleaning it, like an imperfect stone you have to polish, sometimes look irresistible. I may procrastinate A LOT and not take any decisions about something that's not perfectly understood in my mind, but once it is I won't change my mind.

    However, I'm not sure if this is Ni itself, or the combination Ni + Te.

    But even though there're so many great things about dominant intuition, there's nothing worse than a person with a "out of tune" intuition. People like that start making nonsense connections between things, speak in a very obscure and symbolic way that is only making sense to the person him/herself. And sometimes may even get arrogant ("I knew it" kind of attitude) without being able to recognize they're actually wrong.
    Sounds like Ni to me. Really, there are many different ways to describe Ni and Ne. If you have a way you like better, go for it!

    Quote Originally Posted by NeonSyph3 View Post
    Yes, that certainly sounds like Ni (and I can relate to it). Unlike Ne, Ni works with a few ideas and digs deep, contrary to Ne more wider exploring loads of possibilities. Sometimes I get visions splitseconds before the actual happening, almost like a simulation, does it happen you?
    Ne and Ni are both equipped to do this actually. Both functions ask the same questions. What does this mean? What are the implications of this? How can this be used? What happens next? Their difference is in how each function answers these questions.
    luemb, Dreamer777 and INFJalltheway thanked this post.

  7. #26

    Quote Originally Posted by MegaTuxRacer View Post
    So I got really frustrated that there is no good article about Ni vs. Ne. I think to understand either of these functions, one must first recognize what intuition is and that both of these functions simply have a different process by which they intuit information. Indeed all functions are this way, but Ne/Ni are probably the two most misunderstood functions out of the 8. Please leave any comments, criticisms, or suggestions as I fully recognize that I could be very wrong with much of this. However, I do believe I am right, and I think these are good descriptions. If this is indeed a good description of both functions, mods feel free to sticky. Special thanks to @Ace Face for proofreading and checking for correctness for me throughout this process. Without any further ado, enjoy!









    The problem with the cognitive function descriptors that leads to a lot of confusion between the different functions is that one function will be described with traits that the other function possesses, and the other function will have those traits left out. For example, Fi is a value-based moral compass where Fe is an objective judgment of the morals external to the self. Somehow, it seems that many people get the impression that Fe is somehow less moralistic than Fi. I see the same confusion between Ne and Ni.

    The truth is that both are abstract perceiving functions that are all about making connections between abstract ideas. They are both pattern-recognizing and they both deal in symbols and true meaning. The key to understanding both functions is to understand the methods by which they go about doing these things. Both are very different in these methods, and that is where their differences are. This is not something that is easy to explain to someone who does not understand the differences between the two functions in just a few sentences, so this is going to be a long post.

    Ne

    Ah yes, Ne. The best of the intuitive functions! Okay maybe not, but I like it a lot. The truth is that Ne is a really incredible function that is very powerful when used correctly. How Ne intuits ideas is objective. That is to say that it sees symbols, ideas, and patterns in the object at hand rather than the subject (Ni is subjective), so the Ne user sees an objective symbol. For the purposes of this post, please think of an object as anything that can be perceived, such as an object, situation, story, etc. That is not to say that Ne is always correct in its observations. The contrary can also be true. The reason behind this is that Ne will see all possible symbols and ideas for a specific object. However, the Ne user is not always conscious of all of these possibilities. What ends up happening to eliminate these possibilities is that the judging function Ne is working with at any given moment will assist Ne in eliminating certain possibilities. For example, with myself (Ne-Ti), if I saw a car parked, I could easily eliminate the possibility that it has been retrofitted with a rocket to launch it into space since there would be no visible rocket on it, and cars aren’t made that way (but it would be really cool!). That reasoning is that of Ti. If you would like a more colloquial example, ask an ENTP what it’s like when they really like a girl/guy or ask an ISFJ what it’s like when they are really worried about someone they love. Ne without a judging function is extremely irrational, and even with a judging function, that judging function needs to be well developed in order for the user to come to the correct conclusion about all of the possible ideas.

    To summarize this particular point, Ne is an explosion of ideas that sees every possibility, given a specific object. Honing in on one idea is the job of whatever judging function that is working in tandem with Ne. An appropriate visual representation would be that of a supernova. What starts as a star explodes into all of its properties removed from the object itself and completely deconstructed. Ne does a similar thing. It completely deconstructs an object according to the ideas, symbols, systems, what have you associated with that object.

    One thing that is heard often about Ne is that it is all about making connections. That is indeed true, but Ne needs to have a correct base to jump off of in order to make the correct connections. It is my belief that Ne on its own can make connections based on all of the possibilities it intuits, but those connections will have little relevance to the outside world. The resulting structure would look more like a giant ball of tangled Christmas lights a la Christmas Vacation rather than a structured and organized web. Knowing this, a well-developed judging function is crucial to Ne making the correct connections required for being a well-developed individual. So yes, Ne does make a ton of connections, but Ne without any other function does not do this well. Ni doesn’t either, but that’s for a different reason.

    Ni

    Again, as stated above, introverted intuition makes connections, sees symbols, etc. However, Ni is subjective rather than objective. Remember that we are thinking of objective and subjective in the sense that an objective function is all about the object at hand and the subjective function is all about the subject at hand. Given that, Ni without any other functions cannot intuit anything as it perceives based on past data that was gathered by the user. It must be presented with a goal, and it must have data that already exists to work. Where Ne can simply see through an object to its systems and symbols, Ni literally recreates them based on information that is known. In this way, Ni very much studies the subject at hand much like a student would study a subject for school. When studying, the professor or teacher will choose a textbook (or it is chosen for that teacher/professor by the “powers that be”), not all of the information in the textbook is relevant to the subject at hand. In that way, the student will not read through the entire book since the course may simply cover certain chapters. Ni is much the same way, and the Ni user’s past experiences and learned material (facts, feelings, etc.) can be thought of as the textbook in this situation. Ni will skim through the information in a very subconscious manner, ignoring what is irrelevant and including what is relevant. Eventually, much like a student towards the end of the course, what is to be perceived becomes more and more clear until, finally, what is being intuited is simply seen as a whole.

    To use the astronomy example that was used to describe Ne, Ni is much like a nebula. A nebula, if you don’t already know, is a cloud of particulate and other forms of matter in space that slowly forms into a star system. Over time, what looks like an amorphous blob begins to collapse in on itself until a star is formed and possibly planets as well. These solar systems that are formed are there for the long term. Ni is much the same way. The systems and models that Ni forms are often very much long-term models and systems that will stand the test of time and hold up well under scrutiny. This is why Ni is often described as the long-term system building function. The more relevant information an Ni user possesses, the stronger the system that is being built. The less information an Ni user possesses, the weaker the system that is being built or the system may simply never coalesce.

    To summarize Ni, where Ne is an explosion of ideas from one thing, Ni is where one idea coalesces from many ideas.

    Clarifications

    Ne is not a long-term system builder. This is a true statement. In fact, I believe there are only 4 types that are long-term system builders that use Ne. Those are ENTPs, INTPs, ENFPs, and INFPs. And to use the term “build” is somewhat a misnomer. Often an Ne/Ji user will stumble upon a long-term system or simply have an idea once the Ne/Ji has gathered enough information. In many ways, the long-term systems that Ne/Ji users might form can be superior to that of an Ni user, but most of the time they will not. The breadth of knowledge that an Ne user will gather brings new perspective to the systems being built, and it may present an angle that Ni would not have seen as relevant. However, this is somewhat rare. However, in terms of systems that already exist, Ne will almost always see what Ni does not.

    Ni does not see the symbols and connections in ideas and objects external to the self. This is also a true statement. At least it is in terms of directly seeing symbols and connections between objects as they are directly perceived external to the self. Since Ni pulls information that is known to the user away in order to form symbols and systems, it does not perceive an object directly. It takes what is known about the object to form the symbols about that object. In many ways this is reinventing the wheel, so it cannot directly see the symbols in something external to the self. Research (other forms of perception, Je, or actual research) must be done about that object so that Ni can see the symbol.

    Ni takes a long time. This is false. At least in most situations it is. Depending on the complexity of the system being intuited, Ni may instantly form a system or find something’s true meaning quickly, or it may take a long time. This is variable depending on how many moving pieces there are to Ni’s goal.

    Ni is not specific. Ni is as specific as it needs to be. If information is not relevant to the system being formed, Ni ignores it. In this way, Ni users may be very general in the systems they form or they may be very specific. It really depends on Ni’s goal.
    When I read a post like this, I realize I spend too much time in this forum. I see some threads I participated in where your information came from. You then tried to condense all that you have read/learned into one post.

    Your descriptions of these 2 processes apply mainly to Ni and Ne in the first position. Ne in the second position (INTP and INFP) and Ni in the second position (ENTJ and ENFJ) do totally different things. In third position they still have some influence as well.

    So the next step is to understand functions in their positions. After that, how they work together with their neighbors. (just the 3 first functions this applies to.)
    Dove, OceanLee, OceanLee and 2 others thanked this post.

  8. #27

    Someone understands what it's like to be a Ni user after all.

  9. #28

    Without myself being able to understand Ni and Ne Completely and their difference. My take is intuition can be seen as "The Force". <- I know it will sound funny and unserious to alot of people and it should also be taken lightheartedly.

    Intuition = The Force, being able to quickly understand situations and actualy foresee what is going to happen.

    Introverted iNtution as I see it, is the Good Side of The Force.

    Extraverted iNtuition is the Dark Side of The Force.

    I can only argue from my own experience in life, from the real life people that I know. And I think Ni is The Good Side, because I think it is more true to oneself. From my experience alot of my Ne friends are not very true to themselves or others. It's like they understand the puzzle but always has to mess it up or destroy different pieces when putting it together. And eventualy a few pieces of it will be damaged. Whereas, I think Ni will start out slowly, form a greater view of the pieces and as soon as it has put a few pieces together it will take up speed.

    And in the end, the Ni will complete the task with a puzzle undamaged oppossed to that of Ne.

    However, take into consideration that I myself has Introverted iNtuition as my second dominant function. And I might just be arguing for my own best interest.

  10. #29

    I found the article rather incoherent corresponding back to the topic. Its hard to tell if its comparing what's better or distinguishing the differences between the two. If it is doing the former, it is really getting ahead of itself. People with dominant Ni (INTJs and INFJs) can have an explosion of ideas too and are usually quite good at applying those ideas (making them quite intelligent). People with extroverted intuition simply ideas triggered externally. This doesn't mean that people with intuition are weak at that. I obviously don't know exactly what its like to have Ni, because I don't have it, but it just seemed like the author had a bias toward Ne.

  11. #30

    Maybe Ne and Ni are just a bit same thing, I mean intuition is like a 6 sense, so what do we really know about it ?
    Maybe N is extraverted or introverted only because of the primary or auxiliary function, I mean that it works on how we feel/think, but there's no really big differences between Ni/Ne ?


     
Page 3 of 29 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 13 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. How much of each cognitive function do YOU think you have?
    By thehigher in forum Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 57
    Last Post: 07-10-2014, 01:18 PM
  2. [INFJ] New Cognitive Function Quiz
    By Collossus in forum INFJ Forum - The Protectors
    Replies: 66
    Last Post: 04-15-2013, 04:43 PM
  3. What Cognitive Function would this fall under?
    By Jiena in forum Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 10-19-2011, 01:08 AM
  4. Wich Cognitive Function Is That?
    By Garfield in forum Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 01-02-2011, 08:53 AM
  5. [ENFP] Cognitive Function Test
    By cbelle in forum ENFP Forum - The Inspirers
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 08-21-2010, 06:50 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:11 AM.
Information provided on the site is meant to complement and not replace any advice or information from a health professional.
© 2014 PersonalityCafe
 

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0