How can you tell if you use Ne or Ni more?

dulcinea · Mar 7, 2012

I'm actually probably going to post myself as "unknown personality" even though, I hate doing that (sigh) because I put myself so confidently as INFP, and I'm realizing I don't really use Fi all that often. I tend to prefer Fe to Fi.

Now I know the difference, kind of, between Ne and Ni, but I'm not sure which one I use more, because I tend to use both. (I pretty much neglect both sensing functions and prefer to use Intuitive ones, so I guess when one doesn't work, I use the other, which tells me, I'm probably an Intuitive dominant rather than Feeling dominant anyway)

So is there any way, any good and accurate assessment, or line of questioning to determine which one a person uses more than the other?

Worriedfunction · Mar 7, 2012

This is always a good one.

Prepare for a long post...

First off both of them work off inspirations, but it is how they reach these inspirations that is important.

Ne is more arrested by the external environment than Ni. When it comes to Ne it is constantly scanning and picking up bits of information that allow it to work at lightening fast speeds to make a new connection by also using information it can observe and is aware of around it. So a Ne dom walking down the road might see a crack in the pavement, it might send his/her mind running off down a tangent that involves a series of super fast and usually sub-conscious connections to come up with an idea for a new substance for filling in that crack which then wont crack, he/she may be so elated by this sudden understanding or idea that he/she might want to rush home right now and start writing down the formula.

Of course that is just an example, the context of it's usage is as varied as any context you can think of, that was just an example using chemicals and solutions. It can be applied to anything as can all the functions.

In this sense Ne is often seen as more creative than Ni.

Ni on the other hand is like Si, it picks up bits of information and experiences from the past, future and present and then it stores them away at the back of the mind. However unlike Si which uses this data like a dictionary or encyclopaedia, as in bringing up relevant bits of information for the appropriate context, Ni actually uses this ability to build up new idea's or ways of looking at something.

It is often seen as slower than Ne in it's formulations, but it can in fact be very fast, provided it isn't stuck on something.

So a Ni dom walking down the street and seeing that same crack, might wonder, how did it get there? How was it caused? For that matter how did we get here? How were we caused? It's like having a mini philosopher in your mind which constantly looks for deeper implications into things and can usually stretch to a conclusion or new thought from the most obscure influences.

For example im eating crisps...I note how crisps are made by slicing potato's very thin and frying them. This leads me instantly onto the problem many farmers have these days of competeing with the factory style farming methods of big supermarket chains like Tesco's. Then I start thinking about the bigger implications for the my country and the world, if local farming was to die out. Then I start thinking about our role in the universe, these insignificant over-evolved monkey's whose ability of conscious thought strives to put meaning, sense and reality to everything, or else risk going insane. This usually all happens in an instant without needing to go through the steps inbetween.

In any case both these functions change both with context, the functions they are paired with and whether or not they are dominant.
This might become more confusing since a Ne user can dwell upon things like a Ni user and a Ni user can be creative and come up with new ideas, however one will tend towards the other more often and it is this tendency that you need to recognise when it comes to wondering about which function you use more.

AbioticPrime · Mar 7, 2012

Worriedfunction said:
So a Ni dom walking down the street and seeing that same crack, might wonder, how did it get there? How was it caused? For that matter how did we get here? How were we caused? It's like having a mini philosopher in your mind which constantly looks for deeper implications into things and can usually stretch to a conclusion or new thought from the most obscure influences.

My grasp of the cognitive functions isn't that developed yet, but this part sounds like Ti to me, perhaps paired with Ne: breaking down an idea or problem into its constituent parts (Ti) and relating it to other concepts via intuitive connections (Ne).

Is there a particular reason why that example is not Ti+Ne? Can you provide more examples of Ni?

AbioticPrime · Mar 7, 2012

@Worriedfunction, phenomenal! Wish I could thank your posts multiple times!

Based on what you've explained here, my understanding is this:

Ni seeks to discover truths: realistic ways of explaining phenomena, deeper meanings based on evidence which cannot be denied.
Ne seeks to explore and create regardless of how real their playing field is; to conjure for the sake of conjuring.

Worriedfunction · Mar 7, 2012

Serial Hero said:
@Worriedfunction , phenomenal! Wish I could thank your posts multiple times!

Based on what you've explained here, my understanding is this:

Ni seeks to discover truths: realistic ways of explaining phenomena, deeper meanings based on evidence which cannot be denied.
Ne seeks to explore and create regardless of how real their playing field is; to conjure for the sake of conjuring.

Exactly, in fact that's a good way of summing it up, nice one. :wink:

Im glad what I said made sense, that's the hardest part for me sometimes. :laughing:

Im so used to jumping the gun and not explaining my thought process, but fortunately living with a family who primarily do things step by step has taught me the value of an understandable explanation. Im really pleased it made sense.

phantom_cat · Mar 7, 2012

this is why I can never find my type. based on the definition, it changes. Like that example with the crack in the pavement and how to fix it kinda sounds like me, but I wouldn't call myself a random idea generator. Plus talking to someone who is clearly either an INTP with overdeveloped Ne, or ENTP, I was finding it annoying to how they operated. They were always asking me if it will work. My ideas I kept to myself, but I would make hints that I was working on something. Plus they always were defining things, and I don't like to define things by principle. But I also wouldn't call Ne inferior either, or tertiary.

More on topic now... Ne basically generates ideas randomly, then generates more ideas based on the results. Ni has a goal, like "I want to beat that idea.", so they define it kinda, like by saying "based on this, it's so and so (archetypes), but if we look at it this way, it's the same as so and so. so why do it that way, it will result in that. so I'm gonna do it this other way." With Ne, it's more step by step, a b c, etc. With Ni it can skip steps, because it sees the archetypes and what will already happen to them, so it just skips to what it will be.

Blazy · Mar 9, 2012

While @Worriedfunction provides outstanding analyses to clear the fogs that plague the road between the Ni and Ne functions, here are quotes from Typelogic that describes the functions separately in accordance with the specific type.

Ne - ENFP

Extraverted iNtuition
The physical world, both geos and kosmos, is the ENFP's primary source of information. Rather than sensing things as they are, dominant intuition is sensitive to things as they might be. These extraverted intuitives are most adept with patterns and connections. Their natural inclination is toward relationships, especially among people or living things.
Intuition leans heavily on feeling for meaning and focus. Its best patterns reflect the interesting points of people, giving rise to caricatures of manner, speech and expression.

Ni - INFJ

Introverted iNtuition
Introverted intuitives, INFJs enjoy a greater clarity of perception of inner, unconscious processes than all but their INTJ cousins. Just as SP types commune with the object and "live in the here and now" of the physical world, INFJs readily grasp the hidden psychological stimuli behind the more observable dynamics of behavior and affect. Their amazing ability to deduce the inner workings of the mind, will and emotions of others gives INFJs their reputation as prophets and seers. Unlike the confining, routinizing nature of introverted sensing, introverted intuition frees this type to act insightfully and spontaneously as unique solutions arise on an event by event basis.

Ne - ENTP

ENTPs are nothing if not unique. Brave new associations flow freely from the unconscious into the world of the living. Making, discovering and developing connections between and among two or more of anything is virtually automatic. The product of intuition is merely an icon of process; ENTPs are in the business of change, improvement, experimentation.

The attraction Extraverted iNtuition has toward the real and physical amounts to a cosmic non sequitur: theory is drawn to practice. Such encounters are clearly puzzling. Both parties--the intuitor and the realist--are aware of a xenic quality in their meeting, with reactions ranging from recoil to reverie.

Ni - INTJ

Introverted iNtuition
INTJs are idea people. Anything is possible; everything is negotiable. Whatever the outer circumstances, INTJs are ever perceiving inner pattern-forms and using real-world materials to operationalize them. Others may see what is and wonder why; INTJs see what might be and say "Why not?!" Paradoxes, antinomies, and other contradictory phenomena aptly express these intuitors' amusement at those whom they feel may be taking a particular view of reality too seriously. INTJs enjoy developing unique solutions to complex problems.

Hope this helps.

Donovan · Mar 9, 2012

@Lol Dictator

yeah, it might contain Ti depending on how you look at it (and who knows maybe i'm a confused INTP or an ENTP).

it is hard to completely isolate a function from your other functions without causing it to lack a comprehensive explanation... on the flip side, having that explanation become far more involved will likely include other functions (and even if it doesn't, another person might be able to see them in there from their own subjective view--whether they exist in the example or not--not a jibe at you, just putting thought to screen).

edit: side note--all introverted processes will internalize and subjectively rearrange info./whatever as it's taking place within the individual and will be a unique process tied to the self.

maybe another way of putting it is:

Ne: mentally recreates to form potential "links".

Ni: forces or imposes a "link" on what is already there. (i put 'forces' and 'imposes' in italics because Ni isn't really finding a connection or "link" that doesn't exist but is finding new ways of viewing the object that allows for the integral, internal links to be found...?

edit:

or:

Ni: uses multiple perspectives in order to view the object in a more cohesive way--each perspective is a sliver and all the slivers combined=the whole. so unintentional (at times) "thought-queries" are sent out in the form of perspective shifts. in this sense, "arrows travel towards, and into the object".

Ne: takes the object and, again, recreates its environment. it places the object in a field outside of itself and measures/tests it against outside factors. so what is "B"? "well, lets take B and put it in with A+C and now we have A+B+C--that tells us one thing... now lets do it another way". in this sense, Ne starts with the object but all "arrows travel outwards from the object itself".

so, Ne finds it's connections/links from without (the object) while Ni finds them from within (the object)... which is E and I, so i've talked myself into a circle.

another side note: if you don't have Ne, but you do have Ti, could you not mimic the processes of Ne when using Ti? when Ti is used by itself it may just be Ti, but when it has to be applied to outwardly in some fashion, could it not tether or attach a function that is not within the 4-letter makeup in order to assist the function (tertiary in my case)...

i'm not saying that you would have more than the 4 in your type, but that you may be able to mimic if not completely use one outside of your type.

phantom_cat · Mar 10, 2012

celticstained said:
@Lol Dictator

yeah, it might contain Ti depending on how you look at it (and who knows maybe i'm a confused INTP or an ENTP).

it is hard to completely isolate a function from your other functions without causing it to lack a comprehensive explanation... on the flip side, having that explanation become far more involved will likely include other functions (and even if it doesn't, another person might be able to see them in there from their own subjective view--whether they exist in the example or not--not a jibe at you, just putting thought to screen).

edit: side note--all introverted processes will internalize and subjectively rearrange info./whatever as it's taking place within the individual and will be a unique process tied to the self.

maybe another way of putting it is:

Ne: mentally recreates to form potential "links".

Ni: forces or imposes a "link" on what is already there. (i put 'forces' and 'imposes' in italics because Ni isn't really finding a connection or "link" that doesn't exist but is finding new ways of viewing the object that allows for the integral, internal links to be found...?

edit:

or:

Ni: uses multiple perspectives in order to view the object in a more cohesive way--each perspective is a sliver and all the slivers combined=the whole. so unintentional (at times) "thought-queries" are sent out in the form of perspective shifts. in this sense, "arrows travel towards, and into the object".

Ne: takes the object and, again, recreates its environment. it places the object in a field outside of itself and measures/tests it against outside factors. so what is "B"? "well, lets take B and put it in with A+C and now we have A+B+C--that tells us one thing... now lets do it another way". in this sense, Ne starts with the object but all "arrows travel outwards from the object itself".

so, Ne finds it's connections/links from without (the object) while Ni finds them from within (the object)... which is E and I, so i've talked myself into a circle.

another side note: if you don't have Ne, but you do have Ti, could you not mimic the processes of Ne when using Ti? when Ti is used by itself it may just be Ti, but when it has to be applied to outwardly in some fashion, could it not tether or attach a function that is not within the 4-letter makeup in order to assist the function (tertiary in my case)...

i'm not saying that you would have more than the 4 in your type, but that you may be able to mimic if not completely use one outside of your type.

I bolded a line. I've said in other posts that I think Ni feels like looking at the object almost like backwards, or something like that, don't remember my exact words. Ok, just thought of another description. Ni is like having an object that we'll call X. The viewer is A. The subconscious is B. A could view X as whatever it is. B is basically orbiting around X. You don't see X from the view of B, but you will see the result, which is sent to A as Ni, so it looks like you're viewing it backwards. It's like seeing something you never saw (from A's point of view), that's why you don't know how you came up with it.

Perspicacious · Mar 9, 2012

I'm not sure if this would be related to Ni, but here is an instance where I think possibly Ni is at work...

I once tasted a glass of Sake, and the first thing out of my mouth was "this tastes like a nap"

My INTP friend then proceeded to taste it, and sat there staring at it for a moment afterward and said "I could see that."

If I spent some time considering why my immediate response to it was to relate it to a nap, I could probably verbalize why. But, I'd really have had to give it some thought. It just, tasted like a nap.

I've also either predicted things that would happen that happened, or had a "bad or good" feeling and then been correct about that situation or person that feeling was about. There's fully formed "result" that pops into your mind, that skips over all the content, the causality, that assembled it in your mind. It comes as a finished product, and you'd have to sort through all the factors that you picked up subconsciously after the fact to really know how that conclusion popped into existence in your head. It does it all by itself without your conscious effort.

I highly value my INTP friends for their ability to pick apart my head and emotions. It seems to be a common theme among INFJs that while we're quite adept at understanding the inner workings of others, we're a bit more lost when it comes to our own inner workings, emotions, and thoughts. It's probably that combination of crap just popping up subconsciously digested and the Fe desire for harmony and other pleasing... we get a bit removed from ourselves. So when my INTP friends sound off about all the possible reasons I could have for feeling or being a certain way, I get to become more grounded and analyze that with them/through them. INTPs also seem to be constantly analyzing themselves, the people they're close to, and anything they're interested in. I can never take my Ni for granted around them, and in wanting to participate with them I exercise some of the functions that they're skilled with.

May I ask, why do you think you use Fi less than Fe?

elixare · Mar 10, 2012

So is there any way, any good and accurate assessment, or line of questioning to determine which one a person uses more than the other?

When engaging in abstraction do you look inwards or outwards? Ni requires you to focus inside your mind and uncover the pattern within whereas Ne literally requires an external stimulus for the pattern perception process.

Also you don't just use Ni and Ne in and of itself....instead they lie on an axis with their opposing sensing process (ie Ni-Se, Ne-Si) so another question you can ask is do you use Se or Si more and it'll answer the N part as well

Go find an external stimulus and take a good look at that object....if all you see is just a concrete object as it is then that's symptomatic of extroverted sensation and you're therefore likely to be in the Ni-Se/Se-Ni axis....if focusing on that external object triggers a rush of ideas and interrelations then that's symptomatic of extroverted intuition and you're therefore likely to be in the Si-Ne/Ne-Si axis

Also is your abstraction tend to be of depth or breadth? Ni tends to pick, choose, and focus on a smaller number of high quality ideas whereas Ne tends to try to generate as many ideas as possible

Dark Romantic · Mar 10, 2012

I'm going to use a metaphor to explain this.

Imagine a dot, or draw one, if it's easier for you. Make it as big or as small as you want, doesn't matter, just make sure you can see the dot. Now, if you want to understand Ne, picture a line, reaching up from that dot to another one, and going up from the next dot to another one, and so on, and so forth. On top of that, think of a bunch of other lines moving upwards and away from that dot, themselves connecting with other dots, sometimes meeting up with dots which have been previously connected with lines.

That is how Ne works; it sees an object/idea, and shoots out connections to other objects/ideas.

Now, get rid of all the lines you just imagined, or drew, and return to having one dot. Now, below that dot, draw a whole bunch of lines reaching up towards it, connecting at that one point. Make sure they're all coming from the same direction, or else, it's going to look the same as the previous one.

That is how Ni works; it comes to a single conclusion by synthesizing previous lines of thought.

Ne sees possibilities, Ni sees truth.

Blazy · Mar 10, 2012

Yes, this is true. Also, to take a classic example:

Ne:

A, B, Cat, Dog, Elephant, Farmer, Ghost, Hell, Joker, Kill, Lololol....etc...

Ni:

A, B... Z.

Si:

ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ WHAT NOW BITCHES

...

...

...

koalaroo · Mar 10, 2012

This is one analogy I have that could use a lot of work, but it's fairly simple and might help.

Ni - This is a spider testing its web for weaknesses or caught prey.
Ne - This is a spider building its web within a certain framework.

Donovan · Mar 10, 2012

well, at the very least all of our explanations and examples seem to be saying the exact same thing... so that's a start

.

Vexilla Regis · Mar 10, 2012

A goofy question:

When I have insomnia and I am trying to slow down my thinking at night, I like to think about parallel's like , bridges and spam and canned spam. Next,I like to think about all of the possibilities.

Would you say this is NI?

Dark Romantic · Mar 10, 2012

@Mountain Climber: No, that's Ne.

Vexilla Regis · Mar 10, 2012

Dark Romantic said:
@Mountain Climber: No, that's Ne.[/QUOTE

I have a lot of that. Thank you.

Cetanu · Mar 10, 2012

introverted intuition

Supposing, for instance, a man is overtaken by a psychogenic attack of giddiness.
Sensation is arrested by the peculiar character of this innervation disturbance, perceiving all its qualities, its intensity, its transient course, the nature of its origin and disappearance in their every detail, without raising the smallest inquiry concerning the nature of the thing which produced the disturbance, or advancing anything as to its content.
Intuition, on the other hand, receives from the sensation only the impetus to immediate activity; it peers behind the scenes, quickly perceiving the inner image that gave rise to the specific phenomenon, i.e. the attack of vertigo, in the present case. It sees the image of a tottering man pierced through the heart by an arrow. This image fascinates the intuitive activity; it is arrested by it, and seeks to explore every detail of it. It holds fast to the vision, observing with the liveliest interest how the picture changes, unfolds further, and finally fades.
In this way introverted intuition perceives all the background processes of consciousness with almost the same distinctness as extraverted sensation senses outer objects.
For intuition, therefore, the unconscious images attain to the dignity of things or objects. But, because intuition excludes the cooperation of sensation, it obtains either no knowledge at all or at the best a very inadequate awareness of the innervation-disturbances or of the physical effects produced by the unconscious images.
Accordingly, the images appear as though detached from the subject, as though existing in themselves without relation to the person.
- Jung

dulcinea · Mar 10, 2012

I have more information with regard to my question in the OP...

Well, my whole life, I've always wanted a deeper understanding of things, the way life works, the people around me, etc. I often compare my first impression of a subject or person with my current impression to compare what I know now with what I knew then.

Ever since I was 19, I wanted to understand myself, and when I'd write in my journal, I'd often be writing, "I thought such and such was true, but it wasn't true at all, this is true!" I do that a lot too with my understanding of the universe. I always thought that was a part of being a type 5, though.

The way I think is, I want to understand, first of all, myself, so that I know what gifts I have to contribute to my environment or what I have to offer relationships. Second I want to understand others, in a large scale, because people interest me. Thirdly, I want to understand the people in my life, so that I can sense how they feel about me, so that I can know: "Is this a person I can really get close to?" I find a lot of times I can sense when I know it's someone that I can get close to, even though I know I won't feel that closeness to them right away, even before the other person senses it. Fourthly, I want to have as deep an understanding of the universe as I possibly can. I have a great interest in math/science when I have the time to actually pursue this interest. I like to read science articles and try to adjust my thinking to the new understanding.

Also, I love paradoxes; that's one of my favorite subjects. I like logic, logic puzzles, stuff like that. I think my avatar is even a visual paradox when I think of it. I find contradictions to be hilarious. I tend to be initially skeptical of what other people have to say if it contradicts my viewpoint. I tend to be very trusting of my own intuition, sometimes a bit too much so, but sometimes, I can also be very open to exploring ideas different from my own. I tend to create thought experiments to determine whether such scenarios presented to me are plausible in my mind.

When I write, sometimes I just get ideas out of the blue; a lot of times ideas are inspired by something in my life, something I've read, a conversation or sometimes just asking myself, "What if....?". I don't feel comfortable pursuing all my ideas to fruition. Certain ideas I feel more comfortable writing about than others. I can be a pretty picky writer.

Thanks everyone for your replies. I have chunked the information into my "Internal database"; I'm still processing it.

AbioticPrime · Mar 10, 2012

dulcinea said:
Well, my whole life, I've always wanted a deeper understanding of things, the way life works, the people around me, etc. I often compare my first impression of a subject or person with my current impression to compare what I know now with what I knew then.

Ever since I was 19, I wanted to understand myself, and when I'd write in my journal, I'd often be writing, "I thought such and such was true, but it wasn't true at all, this is true!" I do that a lot too with my understanding of the universe. I always thought that was a part of being a type 5, though.

The way I think is, I want to understand, first of all, myself, so that I know what gifts I have to contribute to my environment or what I have to offer relationships. Second I want to understand others, in a large scale, because people interest me. Thirdly, I want to understand the people in my life, so that I can sense how they feel about me, so that I can know: "Is this a person I can really get close to?" I find a lot of times I can sense when I know it's someone that I can get close to, even though I know I won't feel that closeness to them right away, even before the other person senses it. Fourthly, I want to have as deep an understanding of the universe as I possibly can. I have a great interest in math/science when I have the time to actually pursue this interest. I like to read science articles and try to adjust my thinking to the new understanding.

Also, I love paradoxes; that's one of my favorite subjects. I like logic, logic puzzles, stuff like that. I think my avatar is even a visual paradox when I think of it. I find contradictions to be hilarious. I tend to be initially skeptical of what other people have to say if it contradicts my viewpoint. I tend to be very trusting of my own intuition, sometimes a bit too much so, but sometimes, I can also be very open to exploring ideas different from my own. I tend to create thought experiments to determine whether such scenarios presented to me are plausible in my mind.

When I write, sometimes I just get ideas out of the blue; a lot of times ideas are inspired by something in my life, something I've read, a conversation or sometimes just asking myself, "What if....?". I don't feel comfortable pursuing all my ideas to fruition. Certain ideas I feel more comfortable writing about than others. I can be a pretty picky writer.

Thanks everyone for your replies. I have chunked the information into my "Internal database"; I'm still processing it.

You're an INFJ

Narrator · Mar 11, 2012

For what it's worth, I relate to the whole of the above post by dulcinea apart from wanting to understand [myself] since I was 19, trusting [my] own inuitions, and not creating thought experiments - though it depends on what you mean by that, but the sense I'm getting, it's not something I see in myself.

While I'm not an Ne dom aux or tert user, I'll give my thoughts on Si+Ne with the differences in mind.

I've wanted to understand myself since I can remember, I've always wanted to sift through all the possibilities - just enjoyed the possibilities themselves - which come up, and since the beginning of my teens tried to pin my world down through theories/intellectualised/compartmentalised it; though I always accepted it was shifting; pinning it down would be a very at the time thing; working with what I had. But never feeling sure.
The strongest 'intuitions' which come to me come in areas I feel very comfortable, where I can jump across the connections of subject matter I have a more instinctive connection to/relationship with. I get vibes from things, but they're very hazy, and it takes getting away from others and all the input they give off, to get to know what I think about and how I feel. When I'm working on analysing a text I'll have to do it detail by detail, and make jumps via things I can associate, then go back over with a sense of the whole of it attained through the details; there is a tangible connection between each jump, and I fill up/web out (not in the sense it is a web I'm making; rather in the sense there are associations to follow; and that I want to understand the issue; which I do by following associations). However it's a sort've in the moment thing - I'm with each 'piece' of the web as it's being processed, so can find it hard to take a step back and look at the piece as a whole coherent idea. My INFJ friend is much better at expressing coherent ideas in one, while I flounder in following my long association/logic trail. I can have an intuitive sense of something, but it is very hazy and delicate. I also get lost in the theory - as I follow the ideas, I can loose sight of what's realistic, partially because I'm not sure if what I'm trying to understand is right. My aim is to knit the idea together by following all connections; filling in all details, this is the closest I can get to feeling like it's 'right'; if it works as a whole, then it's more likely to be true. To find it as a whole, I need to get all the details.

I think Ne and Ni can both want to understand the nature of things, but Ni is more perspective shifting (Like it starts with a notion of knowing the initial thing it feels is most correct; can identify significant elements, but needs to work on them), and Ne (From my perspective/theorising) is more go with the connections that spring up.

In regards to thought experients, this is how I imagine sorting the things you pick out. Where you'd do that, I'd just follow a train of logic and try to find a conclusion to each piece as it appeared to me (Linear sense, not the way I view it, though understanding how each piece appears to me is the begining of the processing of each piece (It's done in linear fashion, unless I'm more at home with the subject matter/information)).

zallla · Mar 13, 2012

During my own wandering and wondering, I have noticed that the way Ne-user and Ni-user answer your questions is very different. Ne-users list several options, Ni-users have one view. Also, I have sensed that Ni-users find it a lot easier to know which one, Ne or Ni, sounds more familiar to them. It's like Ne-users can imagine many possible ways they might use the process and thus feel they can't tell which one they use more. Luckily with some time and introspection even Ne-doms are able to recognize how their mental activity produces more and more ideas and connections.

For example, I have noticed that if you ask Ne-doms what their life will look like after few years, they will give you several possible options. Ni-doms, however, are more straightforward, they have often more clear opinion what it'll look like, they usually won't list you huge amount of options like Ne-doms could do.

How can you tell if you use Ne or Ni more?

Top Contributors this Month

Recommended Communities