# What's the difference between Ni and Ne?



## huiwcleon (Dec 30, 2011)

I know there are a lot threads talking about differences between extraverted and introverted functions. As an INTJ, and I should have a dominant function of Ni. 

I read some articles and they suggest "Aha!" or "That's it!" realization or bumping into a stone or walking in circle to think about tomorrow's dinner are behaviors of Ni. 

Okay, it's intuition and I do those things very frequently lol, but how come there's another type of intuition presented as Ne. I can't understand how intuition, this between subjective and objective "thing", could come from the outside world.

Cognitive functions, from my point of view, are difficult concepts. Can you guys try your best to explain in a more layman's way?


----------



## Spades (Aug 31, 2011)

Some relevant threads:
http://personalitycafe.com/cognitiv...erted-intuition-vs-extraverted-intuition.html
http://personalitycafe.com/infj-for...erted-intuition-vs-extraverted-intuition.html
Good luck! I've given up on this topic myself.


----------



## MuChApArAdOx (Jan 24, 2011)

Ne sees things from all angles , different sides of a data. It will grab on to those angles and make sense of the bigger picture processing the data coming from all these angles.

Ni also sees things from all angles, although it sees the bigger picture first, eliminating the data it sees that doesn't apply to the end result.

This may not be the best example, although its how i vision the difference between Ne-Ni. Basically Ne explores all the possibilities where Ni eliminates the possibilities.


----------



## reletative (Dec 17, 2010)

Ne is like the mythical unicorn.

Ni is like the mythical griffin.


----------



## Malx (May 17, 2011)

Ni doesn't need someone to confirm their ideas. They may be concerned that they are missing an angle or another way of looking at something.
Ne does need outside confirmation. Being an Ne dom, I'm not usually certain of how good my idea is until I know other people like it. 

Ni may not care to show ideas they find, but Ne is almost certain to spill the beans first chance they get. 
Ni is more concerned about depth Ne is more concerned about breadth
Ni is concerned with abstract, underlying principals Ne is concerned with "what could be"
Ni is like a highway Ne is like millions of rabbit trails
Ni weighs ideas in their mind, Ne finds people to act as sounding boards for their ideas

Just from my own observations, I find it hard to pull ideas out of "no where". Usually what happens for me, is someone will say something and my mind immediately draws a line to something else, and then from that point to something else, until an entirely new picture is formed. Ne plays connect the dots. 
From what I can tell, Ni is a little more linear in their thinking.


----------



## NeedsNewNameNow (Dec 1, 2009)

Ni likes to reach a single best conclusion
Ne likes to keep options open


----------



## AbioticPrime (Sep 1, 2011)

Thanks! People like this make this forum worth revisiting!


----------



## electricky (Feb 18, 2011)

First, understand intuition. This part may be tricky. :wink:

Then apply doses of E and doses of I.

More breadth to Ne than Ni's depth. Expansion to its convergence. Addition to its subtraction. A spreading to its containing.

Then add dash of looking how ENPs and INJs differ, and stir throughly with the fact that, in a similar way to your own difficulty in understanding, I can hardly fathom how to intuit the inner world so much, without outer triggers or things to combine.


----------



## Grunfur (Oct 23, 2011)

The difference between Ne and Ni is primarily that INxJs (Dominant Ni types) will basically on their own figure out things using their "gut feeling". They really don't need to do much effort to figure something out. This is generally why they'd do better at things like school. With this intuitive device, ideas naturally come more to them and they can really start to get a better understanding later on. Some of the intuition uses subconscious memory, where they can allocate thousands of different ideas from past experiences without even realizing it. 

For an individual with Ne they will start to understand things more through reading books and talking to people. They require a lot more effort to figure out what works and rely on far more different sources.


----------



## bobdaduck (Apr 24, 2010)

Ignore articles that say Ni is "aha!" or "That's it!" moments. If you look closely, the article states in between the lines that introverted intuition is magic and that you will never understand it. In fact, "aha moments" are more of a classic intuition (classic meaning MBTI asside) thing, and classic intuition actually correlates much more closely with Ne. Ne is a form of intuition that, as a function attitude takes an idea and diverges out into multiple ideas. As a cognitive function, Ne is a right brain hemisphere process that works creatively and in such a manner as to lead to "aha" moments. In relation to "the box", Ne is a function that thinks outside the box.

Now lets take a look at Ni. Ni as a function attitude believes that everything is arbitrary. Ni holds all perspectives at one time, none more truer than the others. Ni users understand explicitly that "how you look at something determines what you end up seeing" and as such rarely will put things into boxes like "this is true and this is false". As a cognitive process, Ni is a left brain analytical process that works to eliminate information very quickly. Unlike Ne, Ni does not feel any need to bounce ideas and thoughts off of others. Ni works with information completely internally, and rather dislikes releasing half-baked information. In relation to the box, Ni thinks "about the box". Ni looks at the rules and structures underlying things, and one of its main questions is "why?".

TL;DR:
Ni is convergent, Ne is divergent.
Ni is left brain, Ne is right brain.
Ni is internal, Ne is outward
Ni is about the box, Ne is outside the box.

I may post more later if needed.


----------



## alionsroar (Jun 5, 2010)

There is a cat in a hat.

Ni is drawn to what the cat actually is underneath: Despite the hat, it is still just a cat.

Ne is drawn to everything that the cat can be: It has a hat, so it could be a person; it has four legs so it could be a table; it has whiskers so it could be a mouse.


----------



## anon (Oct 19, 2009)

Ni explores possibilities much like Ne, but for that ultimate single vision/conclusion. It is skilled with keeping it's eye fixed at the global picture, enabling it to act as a benchmark to information-gathering, research, exploration and discovery. It is a personalized experience.
Ne explores possibilities for responding to contexts and situations as they arise and as the Ne personality comes across them with curiosity. It can't discern the conclusion/vision as well as Ni but it knows something can be achieved at the conclusion of it all if as many angles of something was absorbed and from it there's a creation of ideas that can be experimented with.


----------



## TaylorS (Jan 24, 2010)

Ne vs. Ni according to Jung:



> The remarkable indifference of the extraverted intuitive in respect to outer objects is shared by the introverted intuitive in relation to the inner objects. *Just as the extraverted intuitive is continually scenting out new possibilities, which he pursues with an equal unconcern both for his own welfare and for that of others, pressing on quite heedless of human considerations, tearing down what has only just been established in his everlasting search for change, so the introverted intuitive moves from image to image, chasing after every possibility in the teeming womb of the unconscious, without establishing any connection between the phenomenon and himself.* Just as the world can never become a moral problem for the man who merely senses it, so the world of images is never a moral problem to the intuitive. To the one just as much as to the other, it is an _ae[]sthenic problem, _a question of perception, a 'sensation'. In this way, the consciousness of his own bodily existence fades from the introverted intuitive's view, as does its effect upon others. The extraverted standpoint would say of him: 'Reality has no existence for him; he gives himself up to fruitless phantasies'. A perception of the unconscious images, produced in such inexhaustible abundance by the creative energy of life, is of course fruitless from the standpoint of immediate utility. But, since these images represent possible ways of viewing life, which in given circumstances have the power to provide a new energic potential, this function, which to the outer world is the strangest of all, is as indispensable to the total psychic economy as is the corresponding human type to the psychic life of a people. Had this type not existed, there would have been no prophets in Israel.


----------



## Life.Is.A.Game (Nov 5, 2010)

NeedsNewNameNow said:


> Ni likes to reach a single best conclusion
> Ne likes to keep options open


I thought that was a Judger/Perceiver thing.


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

no.anger.just.love said:


> I thought that was a Judger/Perceiver thing.


I love your avatar and signature.


----------



## Up and Away (Mar 5, 2011)

Did anyone start with the simple answer?

Ni has an I in it, and Ne has an E in it.


----------



## AbioticPrime (Sep 1, 2011)

no.anger.just.love said:


> I thought that was a Judger/Perceiver thing.


It is... Ni = J Ne = P

What are you not understanding?

J is a collection of Si or Ni and Fe or Te so all 4 of those functions will have traits you'd find in Meyer Briggs J description

Vice versa for P


----------



## Paradigm (Feb 16, 2010)

Serial Hero said:


> It is... Ni = J Ne = P
> 
> What are you not understanding?
> 
> ...


Over-simplification.

Ni is used by the NJs and SPs. Ni-doms are misrepresented by the INxJ shorthand because they're _perceiving_-_dominant_. We don't judge first, we perceive first. (As do ISxJs.)

ExxJ and IxxP are the true "Judgers," it's just the IxxPs aren't as outwardly obvious about it.

What Judging _really _is: the functions Fe, Ti, Fi, and Te.

The other four functions just collect information (Se, Ne) and organize it (Si, Ni) so that we might pass "Judgement."


----------



## Life.Is.A.Game (Nov 5, 2010)

Serial Hero said:


> It is... Ni = J Ne = P
> 
> What are you not understanding?
> 
> ...


That's not what @Paradigm said right below you. He says NJ's and SP's both use Ni...


----------



## Life.Is.A.Game (Nov 5, 2010)

Paradigm said:


> Over-simplification.
> 
> Ni is used by the NJs and SPs. Ni-doms are misrepresented by the INxJ shorthand because they're _perceiving_-_dominant_. We don't judge first, we perceive first. (As do ISxJs.)
> 
> ...


OMG SOOO COMPLICATED!!!! I don't get itttttttttt!


----------



## MNiS (Jan 30, 2010)

Serial Hero said:


> Ni is the master of picking out the most relevant information.
> 
> For example, let's take a classroom group-work scenario:
> You're in some shitty pseudoscientific class like anthropology. The teacher, which your Ni has long since realized by now, is an ESFJ following a predefined and obvious (to you) agenda. She gives you a piece of paper with a list of data on it and tells you to get into groups and come up with a response to a specific question.
> ...


The part I've bolded sounds more Fi than Ni.

The simplest way I can describe Ni is that when receiving information, I see it as a kind of mental filter. It's also a pretty good BS detector IMO.


----------



## OrangeAppled (Jun 26, 2009)

MisterNi said:


> The part I've bolded sounds more Fi than Ni.
> 
> The simplest way I can describe Ni is that when receiving information, I see it as a kind of mental filter. It's also a pretty good BS detector IMO.


It may not be Ni, but I don't think it's Fi at all. It acually sounds very Se to me, but not entirely either. I've read Se being associated with "noticing relevant facts in a sea of data before you" and "instantly reading cues to see how far you can go" and "setting up people's responses and finessing an impression that makes an impact". Granted, these descriptions are kind of, er, vague, but if you relate it to the stereotypical Se salesman personality, then you see how the Se person notes & acts upon their perceptions of the other person to manipulate the other person's response, likely using visual cues such as body language, etc, but also direct stated facts. This is not so different from Ne, as far as trying to see how far one can go; Ne instead uses intangible vibes as opposed to visual cues, implied potential as opposed to hard facts, etc. Se & Ne are often about pushing boundaries (physical vs conceptual), so the focus is not on what someone else wants, but what they can defy and still prove "successful".

@Serial Hero 's description of Ne is bizarre and off the mark for me, granted it is not my dominant, but still...

I'd say that the NP stopped listening to the teacher's instructions about halfway through once they got the gist of the project and their mind generated that big picture of what it's about. NPs most certainly pick up on patterns in people though; descriptions of Ne make them out to be charismatic and influential to others because they pick up on intangible info about people & manipulate people's perceptions. When I was in school, I would quickly see what I could and could not get away with 

Rules are made to be broken for the NP, so rather than considering all the instructions and getting confuzzled, they toss them aside and begin to consider possible ways of accomplishing the goal outside of the expected manner. The NP wants to challenge the idea that X must be done in Y way. They'll take delight in defying the teacher's instructions but still producing a high quality work because they found their own innovative way that makes the teacher's methods seem antiquated. They may not even realize they are defying anything because they didn't bother with the rules to begin with; they're focused on how this provides an opportunity for change. Here you see Ji - the NP is striving to meet their personal vision. The project is not about pleasing the teacher, but using an opportunity to meet their own personal potential, and maybe in the process stir things up a bit with others (Ne-dom like to affect other people's perceptions, to make them see things differently). The NP doesn't care about the task at hand so much as using it as a bridge to something more interesting.

A good teacher appreciates a student like this. I was lucky to have teachers who didn't scold me for accomplishing a project in a unique manner. Instead they appreciated that I had a unique take on how to do it and produced something of quality that was unlike the other student's work. On the other hand, I also tested their boundaries a little by quickly perceiving what I likely could get away with (ie. being late, skipping work, etc, but still getting a good grade).


----------



## saffron (Jan 30, 2011)

I agree that @Serial Hero's example is really off for Ne here. In school, I have always had the experience of getting where the instructions were going in the first couple of sentences followed by intense irritation that the instructions continued for another 10 minutes followed by people asking really obvious questions. 

And I can read people quite well. I may not give them a ready made label, but I generally know the way their brain works and what they are looking for. I just don't always care about the latter, or more often am looking for a way to enjoy the assignment and spin off from it while not shooting myself in the foot grade wise. I do sometimes have to revisit expectations to make sure my final idea (and reigning in the ideas is the hard part of the assignment) loosely fits. The objective is creating something that pushes the boundaries and is interesting and of quality more so than jumping through a hoop and getting the easy A. I still want (and usually get) an A though. I just have to find the right idea/angle that will work for me and the teacher.


----------



## Zero11 (Feb 7, 2010)

Serial Hero said:


> Do you relate?
> 
> Nis? Nes?


50/50 I can relate but the example seems to be a really bad one.


----------



## phantom_cat (Jan 1, 2011)

Ne create many ideas in a step by step way branching off into more ideas, "if this is true, that means I can do this, that, and that..." So now that one idea becomes 5 ideas, then each of those, based on the results, becomes more ideas.

Ni creates an idea and perfects it. It uses many ideas and narrows down to the best fit. It may accept more than one way, but wants that one, two, or three "best" ways. "I can do it this way, but based on what will happen, this fixes that problem. so this way is best."

While Ne could come up with 100 ideas, Ni may come up with just a fraction of that, but it would be "perfected" and will probably combine many of Ne's ideas. If Ne ideas were followed through to the end, it will meet Ni already there.

Ne ideas: a, b, c... each being an idea.
Ni ideas: a, b, g, q, x, y, z. each being an idea.

Ne will reach c, while Ni is already on say... g, because Ni already anticipates what will happen, but Ni doesn't stop at c, it skips it. Ne needs to bounce ideas off of other people, while Ni bounces the ideas off of itself.


----------



## AbioticPrime (Sep 1, 2011)

Zero11 said:


> 50/50 I can relate but the example seems to be a really bad one.


It's one I identified with myself, perhaps my impression what Ni is is skewed.

Can you provide a better one?


----------



## Zero11 (Feb 7, 2010)

@_Serial Hero_ 

Change the setting and replace the ESFJ Teacher :happy:


----------



## AbioticPrime (Sep 1, 2011)

Zero11 said:


> @_Serial Hero_
> 
> Change the setting and replace the ESFJ Techer :happy:


Okay, Marine World and a dolphin respectively. Now what?


----------



## Zero11 (Feb 7, 2010)

Ni is the master of picking out the most relevant information.

For example, let's take a marine world group-work scenario:
You're in some shitty pseudoscientific class like anthropology. The teacher, which your Ni has long since realized by now, is an Dolphin following a predefined and obvious (to you) agenda. She gives you a piece of paper with a list of data on it and tells you to get into groups and come up with a response to a specific question.

The Ne in your group will look at the information on the paper and have no clue where to begin -- he will be overwhelmed by all the data. He's not sure exactly what it is the teacher wants at this point, probably because he hasn't picked up on where the teacher is headed with her agenda, what kind of person she is, what she's going to be expecting based on who she is and the path she's already taken -- he probably hasn't noticed the pattern. So what will he do? He'll look at the info and instantly come up with a bunch of good ideas based on the data, but the ideas he comes up with aren't that relevant to the task at hand.

You? You've been paying attention to what the teacher is like and what she wants because you KNOW (intuitively) that it's important to understand who the teacher is to be successful in the class (that's Ni). So, based on the unexpressed expectations you've discovered -- you have a general idea of what needs to be found from that list of data (Ni). You then take a few moments to look for that data and can easily pick out exactly what you need to to answer the teacher's prompt efficiently and effectively in order to receive the best grade.

It works.

@_Serial Hero_ 
Curse you :sad:


----------



## AbioticPrime (Sep 1, 2011)

Zero11 said:


> Ni is the master of picking out the most relevant information.
> 
> For example, let's take a marine world group-work scenario:
> You're in some shitty pseudoscientific class like anthropology. The teacher, which your Ni has long since realized by now, is an Dolphin following a predefined and obvious (to you) agenda. She gives you a piece of paper with a list of data on it and tells you to get into groups and come up with a response to a specific question.
> ...


So, you just wasted my time and energy...


----------



## Captain (Jan 25, 2012)

Ok, say I just watched a very symbolic movie with my wife. During the movie I was automatically picking up on the symbolism and understanding it automatically. It just flowed in and connected itself to other unrelated abstract thoughts, ideas, or theories I had. 

My wife asks, "what the hell did that mean?". I tell her about some grand abstract idea and how it connects to these other abstract ideas. She says, "how can it mean that? Explain!". But I can't explain. I just know. In order to explain it, I have to go into my head and use Ti to break it down into the logical connections. Is it Ne that gave me the grand abstract movie explanation to begin with?


----------



## quixoticcrush (Mar 15, 2013)

This is the way I interpret my Ni (tell me if I'm wrong):

Last night my neighbor's cat was having kittens. I sat with my neighbor on her couch while the cat was birthing kittens in a box in a far corner of the room. Every so often my neighbor would get up and check on the cat. I would also get up intermittently to check also but not as often. Every single time I got up to check, another kitten was coming out and I'd be the first to see it be born. This happened 5 times with 5 kittens being born. After the fifth kitten I decided to come back home and told my neighbor to call me to tell me if the cat has any more kittens. This morning she came over and told me no more kittens were born after I left. 

I interpreted this as my Ni subconsciously telling me that another kitten was being born and I needed to get up and witness it even though I was not aware that this was going on at the time. My Ni also told me to go home after the 5th kitten because there would be no more however I was not consciously aware of this.

I think if I had Ne I would be consciously aware of a gut feeling telling me to go and look because a kitten was being born and then letting me know it was okay to go home after the 5th kitten.

Another weird coincidence is that I had went over to her house without knowing her cat was having kittens. I had originally gone over there to borrow a pitcher to make iced tea in. It's like the cat starting having kittens as soon as I came through the door.

In other words, Ni is subconscious, while Ne is conscious????? 

Am I right?

I hope I explained this well enough. 

Another example would be watching some trivia show and knowing an answer to an obscure questions without knowing the process of how you arrived at that answer, just that you knew the answer?


----------



## quanked Lucubrator (Apr 7, 2013)

Could the main difference between Ni and Ne be quickly summarized as this:

Ni recognizes patterns in one given situation (like fitting a curve to a set of data points / finding a model to describe this situation)

Ne recognizes patterns between several situations (analogies / comparing different models (belonging to different kinds of situations) that share a common structure)

(And both Ni and Ne convert raw data into patterns / simplified models of reality)

Does this make sense?


----------



## PaladinX (Feb 20, 2013)




----------



## PaladinX (Feb 20, 2013)

quanked Lucubrator said:


> Could the main difference between Ni and Ne be quickly summarized as this:
> 
> Ni recognizes patterns in one given situation (like fitting a curve to a set of data points / finding a model to describe this situation)
> 
> ...


It makes sense in my mind. One is contextual and the other is trans-contextual.


EDIT:
To expand on this analogy...

Se sees the data points in its original form. Ni re-arranges the data points to discover new interpretations. 

Si forms opinions about the data. Ne relates it to other data.


----------



## Takadox (Apr 5, 2013)

Ni and Ne are both elements (nickel and neon)

Ne is an extroverted function and therefore starts from the outer world and takes this data inward and searches for connections from either other outside objects or previous knowledge, but usually both and in a very rapid manner usually. This makes for some very interesting comparisons between objects and ideas, usually quite amusing.

Ni is an introverted function and starts from inner ideas and concepts and tries to adapt the outer world to the ideas of the inner one, which makes the connections much more linear than Ne but still not entirely otherwise it wouldn't be quite as creative.

Well at least that's my idea on the subject, I'm much more well versed on Ne, but have some theoretical understanding of Ni.


----------



## VodkaBear (Mar 5, 2013)

bobdaduck said:


> If you look closely, the article states in between the lines that introverted intuition is magic and that you will never understand it.


This is pretty much what I always got from the reading about the two.


----------



## VodkaBear (Mar 5, 2013)

Takadox said:


> Ne is an extroverted function and therefore *starts from the outer world and takes this data inward* and searches for connections from either other outside objects or previous knowledge, but usually both and in a very rapid manner usually. This makes for some very interesting comparisons between objects and ideas, usually quite amusing.
> 
> Ni is an introverted function and *starts from inner ideas and concepts and tries to adapt the outer world* to the ideas of the inner one, which makes the connections much more linear than Ne but still not entirely otherwise it wouldn't be quite as creative.


This is the best definition I've heard yet although I've even heard the opposite (Ne starting with an idea and finding things to prove it and Ni starting with information and putting them together to make an idea) so who knows really.


----------



## PaladinX (Feb 20, 2013)

I think this is a good description of Ni (taken from the Batman thread in the MBTI section):



> Ni is the creation of mental imagery independent of outer stimuli. Ni generates abstract structural images or concepts of a given problem domain that a person can view from different points of view at will. Ni focuses on the structure of things from a timeless point of view. Ni focuses on ideas and connects subjects, concepts, and experiences to the big picture while Si is oriented towards concrete detail and the small frame of what is sensed by direct experience.


----------



## Grunfur (Oct 23, 2011)

Another important thing to note is Ne focuses more on creating abstractions with the other functions in a far more continuum context. In other words, Ne will absorb new ideas and base their other functions off of that as well almost in a sense that there is a story with all the functions. Si and Ne relate tremendously for example, Si having the sensational appeal to eating chocolate, maybe chocolate also has some interesting value that makes it delicious. So they are all working together to almost create a story. Whereas Ni, is more future oriented and will instead of create a story will already have the story through enough collection of the other functions (namely Se) and want to implement this story (Fe, Te). This story has some sort of external value. Once an Ni user has gained enough knowledge through the other will form their conclusions based on Ni and continuously work toward that conclusion. They also try to be certain that their conclusion is correct, whereas Ne won't be so concerned with concluding so quickly. They'd be more prone to analysis and trying to absorb as much information as possible. Rather than working toward their conclusions, they'd find more. So Ni is more subject to focus internally on their conclusions and usually have a lot more deep ones, but Ne is trying to seek as many possibilities as there are and they tend not to be as accurate as Ni. Ne users will jump around a lot more. Se is usually helping the Ni. By gaining enough details such as if one were to play a sport like basketball (very Se tendency), and discovered a good way to throw the ball behind them, so the opponent cannot get the ball it will help the Ni build stronger realizations later on like "the method of tricking what one normally anticipates in a sport is the most effective for playing a sport". An Ne user usually thinks more on the spot about that thinking "this looks like a good opportunity to trick the opponent" (Ne) it is only usually later on that they realize "what's a good way to do this" and kinda have to personalize the scenario themselves (Si) "I know it would be difficult for me to reach the ball if it were behind my back. I'll do that." And for this reason, Se users typically make better sportsmen, since they can "think on their feet" (sorry NPs). Nonetheless, creating patterns and basing it off other patterns is a far more Ne thing to do. So again with basketball, an Ne user will throughout the game "let's trick the opponent", "I saw when I tricked the opponent it also led the other team to get more frustrated", "Frustration seemed to let them play a lot less effectively". See Ne jumps around a lot more. But Ni users will keep playing, using their Se a lot of the time and it is only really later on until they start to get revelations about it. And these insights are far less focused on "game tactics" that Ne users would rely on and far more on "game planning" that bases previous patterns in Se off of big picture possibilities. This is why Ni users can often be very good at strategy games. They have good planning skills. Ni is more of a strategic function and Ne is more of a creative function.

In a nutshell,
Ne creates a story and Ni implements their story
Ne is far more speculative and Ni is far more goal oriented
Ne focuses on having multiple conclusions and Ni focuses on having one conclusion and acquiring more details over time
Ne is more prone to create and Ni is more prone to plan


----------

