# How Does Ne Read Social Cues And Behavior In Real Time?



## LadyO.W.BernieBro (Sep 4, 2010)

l've never really felt like l actually pay attention to ''literal'' social cues in the present moment. 

Yet l've never had any trouble with things like invading someone's personal space, talking over them, not noticing when they aren't listening anymore or other issues that are supposed to arise from a lack of awareness.

Still, l'm not really tuned into specific cues. How does Ne handle this?

The only way l could describe what l think l feel like during conversation is somehow interpreting the cues while being tuned out, almost "symbolically" for lack of a better explanation. l don't really understand it and can't describe it effectively. 

l can feel energy from a person and actually it can be so intense that l think it's what causes me to tune out from paying attention to the literal body language and facial expressions.

Which function is supposed to be most effective with this? l'd think Se, but then it's said that N types read people better. l'm wondering if that means we read people better in real time or not.

l think l read people in real time well enough to avoid any kind of social mishaps but that the way l generally treat a person is more based on a collective understanding l have of the way they think/act/things they say coupled with the vibes l get from them. 

l'e noticed some NTJ friends actually seem a lot more awkward than me with body language and conversational flow, so l'm curious about Ni too. l've had good chemistry with a few INTJs after getting to know them well but it seems like the lack of Se affects them too.


----------



## LiquidLight (Oct 14, 2011)

A lot of what you are describing would, if it related to anything, relate to the feeling function not intuition.


----------



## Word Dispenser (May 18, 2012)

OMG WTF BRO said:


> l've never really felt like l actually pay attention to ''literal'' social cues in the present moment.
> 
> Yet l've never had any trouble with things like invading someone's personal space, talking over them, not noticing when they aren't listening anymore or other issues that are supposed to arise from a lack of awareness.
> 
> ...


You can see Ne in real time.






I relate to everything you say, by the way. I do exactly the same things. 

Interrupting all the time, not really seeing 'body language'. But, I'll sort of assess the overall situation. This is what I guess I do:

I can see the demeanour of the individual(s), group, etc. I probe mentally, analyzing in a few seconds to determine what I can get away with. It's not body language or facial expression, but it's a kind of 'mood', measured against past information. I think it's like.. Ne-Ti-Fe squished together and weighed against Si.


----------



## LadyO.W.BernieBro (Sep 4, 2010)

Robin can tune in if he wants to but he actually seems really oblivious to me most of the time, when he's in his zone which is probably an effect of Ne.

That's a good interview but mostly l don't like watching him on TV because it's uncomfortable and awkward and the late night hosts always have to get him toTTT stop monologuing lol.

For stand-up it's ideal, he's not affected by anything and can just keeping going like that for hours.


----------



## LadyO.W.BernieBro (Sep 4, 2010)

LiquidLight said:


> A lot of what you are describing would, if it related to anything, relate to the feeling function not intuition.


So does Ne work with the other functions in reading people? Or is that a person with a lack of Se relies on the feeling function more because of it?
l've seen Robin Williams typed as ENFP which seems plausible enough, most of the time though it seems like his Ne causes him to be less sensitive to social context. But l wouldn't use him as the standard depiction, l think he's generally extremely inattentive and can't control it.

Fi wouldn't be as ideal as Fe for reading others l suppose, though l see a lot of really perceptive ENFPs so it must work with Ne in some way. ENFPs and ESFPs seem to pick up on different things and both use Fi, maybe more attention paid to underlying context with an ENFP with the ESFP catering to a person's immediate needs(not really familiar with ESFPs but it's how l've seen the differences described).


----------



## Word Dispenser (May 18, 2012)

OMG WTF BRO said:


> So does Ne work with the other functions in reading people? Or is that a person with a lack of Se relies on the feeling function more because of it?
> l've seen Robin Williams typed as ENFP which seems plausible enough, most of the time though it seems like his Ne causes him to be less sensitive to social context. But l wouldn't use him as the standard depiction, l think he's generally extremely inattentive and can't control it.
> 
> Fi wouldn't be as ideal as Fe for reading others l suppose, though l see a lot of really perceptive ENFPs so it must work with Ne in some way. ENFPs and ESFPs seem to pick up on different things and both use Fi, maybe more attention paid to underlying context with an ENFP with the ESFP catering to a person's immediate needs(not really familiar with ESFPs but it's how l've seen the differences described).


 I was once able to discern that a guy I barely knew, who only looked somewhat geeky, could speak Japanese. I figured he watched anime. 

I managed to test this theory pretty smoothly by using a Japanese-speaker, in the right context (I myself am not well-versed, although I could be.). He was just wearing thick black glasses. Everything else was 'normal'. 

I made a sweeping generalization based upon his 'demeanour', what I figured his interests were, and I was right. 

It was weird, but awesome.


----------



## LadyO.W.BernieBro (Sep 4, 2010)

Word Dispenser said:


> I was once able to discern that a guy I barely knew, who only looked somewhat geeky, could speak Japanese. I figured he watched anime.
> 
> I managed to test this theory pretty smoothly by using a Japanese-speaker, in the right context (I myself am not well-versed, although I could be.). He was just wearing thick black glasses. Everything else was 'normal'.
> 
> ...


Yeah. l have weird flashes like that and won't notice more obvious things.

l'm as inattentive as l ever was but try to control it outwardly, internally l'm thinking of lots of different things in a manic-esque state but haven't been that outwardly ''Ne'' in a long time lol. Maybe developing Fe has caused me to behave more calmly in social situations. But l think it leads to the random and sometimes not random insight about people.

l feel the same kind of connection with most NPs as l do with some other types who dn't even use Ne in the first four functions so it could be based partially in the feeling function too, l had an instantaneous connection with someone who later said she was INFJ and we share Fe.


----------



## Abraxas (May 28, 2011)

You're watching someone play a video game.

Something happens on the screen.

By no small stretch of the imagination, it implies an angry white guy running around acting silly.

You recall vaguely seeing something like that in a really funny movie.

But instead of setting up your joke so everyone can follow it, you just spout it off expecting everyone to recognize the reference.

Only those who are extraverted intuitive types will probably catch on, because extraverted intuitive types are probably the best at recognizing the relationships between objects and events in the external world that _anyone would/could/should notice._ But, just how they determine that these relationships actually exist is an act of judgment, likely extraverted as well, which will ultimately depend on how educated and experienced they are with the context at hand.

So, for instance, stick an extraverted intuitive type who prefers feeling judgment auxiliary into a situation where they are very familiar with whatever is going on, and they are going to be recognizing all sorts of ways to get everyone to lighten up and enjoy themselves - or, if they are in a bad mood, how to troll and offend everyone. HOW they end up exercising their feeling judgment will depend upon just whatever possibility they want to promote, because Ne is their dominant function and so it's "agenda" comes first, and feelings only serve as a useful tool in that respect.

Examples of Ne-dom types are all those kinds of pranksters, jokers, gamblers, risk-taking elitists who get bored with everything easily and hate it when you don't catch onto their cliche and trope references. They expect everyone to understand everything right away, and they hate explaining things. They want _reality itself_ to reflect their own ego - to be _intuitive and extraverted_. So, they have very little patience for introverts who don't know what they are talking about, or for non-intuitive types who have to be told everything before they can make a leap-of-cognitive-faith, take a little social risk, and just assume something is true. Of course, the catch is they have to be correct in their assumption as well, which the intuitive type probably is, and other types probably are not.



*Family Guy is basically Ne-humor exemplified. Watch that show and you'll see what I just explained actually happening.*

You'll find people _everywhere_ who love that kind of humor.

As a matter of fact, I watch a show on youtube called "Two Best Friends Play"

Great example of the banter you get between a couple of Ne-doms.






Notice all the Ne?

The way they make tons of references to everything under the sun, and they're so FAST about doing it, with lightning speed and _accuracy_, they are _highly conscious of what their intuition is showing them_.

Also, they're both probably auxiliary feeling types.

<Consciousness>

Extraverted type.

Intuition>Feeling>Thinking>Sensing


----------



## LiquidLight (Oct 14, 2011)

OMG WTF BRO said:


> So does Ne work with the other functions in reading people? Or is that a person with a lack of Se relies on the feeling function more because of it?
> l've seen Robin Williams typed as ENFP which seems plausible enough, most of the time though it seems like his Ne causes him to be less sensitive to social context. But l wouldn't use him as the standard depiction, l think he's generally extremely inattentive and can't control it.
> 
> Fi wouldn't be as ideal as Fe for reading others l suppose, though l see a lot of really perceptive ENFPs so it must work with Ne in some way. ENFPs and ESFPs seem to pick up on different things and both use Fi, maybe more attention paid to underlying context with an ENFP with the ESFP catering to a person's immediate needs(not really familiar with ESFPs but it's how l've seen the differences described).


Being sensitive to a social context involves 1) your socialization and 2) your ability to evaluate that context. There are a number of ways in which a social context can be evaluated, and everyone will do it differently, often via their dominant function. But typically if a judgment is being made, it is done with a rational functions since the perceiving functions simply perceive they do not rationalize. Ne does not tell you good or bad. That is the job of the feeling function.

Jung described intuition very simply as essentially telling us where something came from and where its going, without necessarily having any physical evidence to back up those notions. Just a hunch. Intuition tells us what to expect next, even though we often have no real way of knowing what is truly coming next. Intuition gives us a sense of things that are not recognizable by other means of perception, it is truly a sixth sense if you will.

The Feeling function on the other hand is the means by which we make evaluations about things. If for example, one sense that a something is amiss (like walking down a dark alley) this is probably a combination of 1) an intuition telling you there's more to this scene potentially than meets the eye (notice the disregard of actual evidence in favor of the hunch - sensation favors actual evidence, if it doesn't look like anything it probably isn't anything) and 2) your feeling function making an evaluation as to whether things are good, bad, etc. (In this situation there are probably some other less cognitive things going on too like flight or fight reflex). 

In a more realistic setting of say a party where one person begins to sour the mood, its really more the 'feeling' or the atmosphere is being interrupted. Thinking cannot deduce this, there is no logical equation for 'guy spoils party' and intuition really only might give us a hunch as to why, it is the Feeling function that conveys to us that the mood has changed for example. This is why people with undeveloped feeling are often bad in social situations because they are often not attuned to the nuances of things like mood, social atmosphere, in some cases beauty, aesthetic, all the things that get associated with a highly differentiated feeling function. A Feeling type designer, for instance, might place two pieces of furniture in a room, perhaps that are of different eras simply because they 'go together.' That is a feeling way of looking at things, the two elements 'feel good' together, even if logically they are misplaced (Louis XV Roccoco with Le Corbusier modern is not a logical pair, and yet under the right circumstances they can create an interesting juxtaposition, but this can only be deduced by feeling not by thinking). 

I'm not sure I would say Fi is less effective at reading others. Fe is certainly more attuned to the environment, being an extraverted function, but again Feeling is about evaluation not really empathy. Fe types are not necessarily anymore empathetic than Fi-types, even if they appear to be, but rather simply will evaluate based on a standard that is set by the environment not some inner ideal like Introverted Feeling. Introverted Feeling always judges against the inner ideal no matter what is going on in the environment, the inner image is always the thing by which all things must be evaluated. If it lives up to some inner ideal then it is 'good' and if not it is 'bad,' Fi needs not check with someone else to validate itself. Because feeling types are generally after seeking 'good feeling,' that is to say pleasant vibes or good atmosphere and the corresponding positive emotions that fuel their feeling function, there may be a tendency for them to try and cultivate positive atmospheres, that especially Fe types are known for. When the world fails to live up to this, though (as it often does) it can also result in a person who is a perpetual crumudgeon--always cranky, pouring cold water on everything ("meh, I've seen better"), is never satisfied if things don't live up to their impossible standards (which often objectively may not be as high as the person thinks) and, in the case of a Fe-type, is something of a bossy busybody who arrogantly thinks that all would be well if people valued things in the same manner (think of the sterotypical PTA mom or a lot of religious demagogues).


----------



## Abraxas (May 28, 2011)

@LiquidLight

*"Fe is certainly more attuned to the environment, being an extraverted function, but again Feeling is about evaluation not really empathy."*

Thank you, thank you, thank you for pointing this out.

I'm going to have to incorporate that into my own explanations now. That's such a great way to put it.


----------



## LadyO.W.BernieBro (Sep 4, 2010)

Abraxas said:


> You're watching someone play a video game.
> 
> Something happens on the screen.
> 
> ...


l agree but the bolded part is a little harsh lol.

l would want that ideally and l often think l can't be close to someone who doesn't get that kind of humor or reference but l've been wrong in some cases. l dated an INTJ who only understood it coming from me after he knew me well. 

Before that, it wasn't like he thought l was crazy but he didn't catch on the way other Ne types he would, he understood the humor but he seemed to want some kind of "verification'' from me first. When l first met him, l didn't really think he "got'' me and l sort of had the attitude you described but l gave him a chance and we became extremely close.

For me it's less about someone not getting it and me thinking they're unworthy. More so that it's really tied in with the way l think so it makes me think that if someone doesn't get it, they won't understand me.

The only types l probably can't have long term friendships with are the types who are "spooked'' by this kind of humor or completely baffled, l really don't understand that mindset but IME NJs get it and are a little more hesitant to recognize it immediately for whatever reason.

ln general, l still do project some of my own reality onto the external world, l try very hard to acknowledge objective reality too though lol.


----------



## bearotter (Aug 10, 2012)

Yes and @LiquidLight @Abraxas

I think the way I started viewing it is, feeling revolves around evaluative reasoning, it's the character of the reasoning, the standard it's held to and the goal it's after, that characterize it to be evaluative. Especially after that one thread where someone tried to ask if feeling is confined to evaluating good/bad -- I say that's just one flavor of the nature it takes.


----------



## bearotter (Aug 10, 2012)

@_OMG WTF BRO_

I think Ne being your perceiving function, together with Fe being your mode of evaluation, might as a combination influence what you're noticing. Being able to determine the energy of someone is very likely if not certainly going to involve some F reasoning. One might use T reasoning to sort what F tells you, but it seems hard to avoid there.
The Ne's extroversion certainly can help with swiftly generating the right kinds of objective perspective with which to approach the F-reasoning which is to say _perceiving data which was not sensed_ certainly can augment your ability to read someone and know the appropriate response, although it can also detract of course. Furthermore, functions work together in a person - all these things, let's not forget, happen in a few split seconds, and so in reality the judgments Fe undertakes certainly influence your objective intuition as it continues onwards, possibly through what your backburner Si registers.


----------



## LadyO.W.BernieBro (Sep 4, 2010)

bearotter said:


> @_OMG WTF BRO_
> 
> I think Ne being your perceiving function, together with Fe being your mode of evaluation, might as a combination influence what you're noticing. Being able to determine the energy of someone is very likely if not certainly going to involve some F reasoning. One might use T reasoning to sort what F tells you, but it seems hard to avoid there.
> The Ne's extroversion certainly can help with swiftly generating the right kinds of objective perspective with which to approach the F-reasoning which is to say _perceiving data which was not sensed_ certainly can augment your ability to read someone and know the appropriate response, although it can also detract of course. Furthermore, functions work together in a person - all these things, let's not forget, happen in a few split seconds, and so in reality the judgments Fe undertakes certainly influence your objective intuition as it continues onwards, possibly through what your backburner Si registers.


l've always been a little unsure about the way the functions work together. l've never known if it was more like an ENTP would be primarily operating in Ne nearly all the time and using their respective functions in order during "down times" (which is sometimes what l do but those are probably just after phases of over drive) or using all of them at basically the same time so that you can't really separate them effectively.

l've also wondered when the tertiary function develops, for me l'd say during adolescence, so l had the seemingly hyperactive outward effects of being Ne driven in childhood and was labelled with behavioral disorders but am mostly laid back now. l'd definitely agree that it was Fe that actually caused me to tune into my surroundings.


----------



## LiquidLight (Oct 14, 2011)

bearotter said:


> Yes and @_LiquidLight_ @_Abraxas_
> 
> I think the way I started viewing it is, feeling revolves around evaluative reasoning, it's the character of the reasoning, the standard it's held to and the goal it's after, that characterize it to be evaluative. Especially after that one thread where someone tried to ask if feeling is confined to evaluating good/bad -- I say that's just one flavor of the nature it takes.


To say Feeling just evaluates good/bad would be a very primitive way of looking at feeling. That might be the case for someone with a very unconscious inferior feeling function where their experience of the feeling function is almost more like a gut-reaction than high differentiation, but I think Hillman's analogy of Feeling being the rationale of the heart which the mind does not understand is probably more appropriate. Something like mood or appropriateness or timeliness might also be the role of the feeling function as is knowing when to hold back or let someone have it (again one of the reasons why Thinking types are often stereotyped for being bad at all these things). But this goes above and beyond simple like/dislike or good and bad. Those would be very, very rudimentary ways of employing the feeling function. True to the essence of the function, but not the sumtotal of it.


----------



## bearotter (Aug 10, 2012)

@LiquidLight exactly my thoughts. Much as thinking is only _tied_ to measures of validity such as external truth/falsehood or internal truth/falsehood, but not entirely defined by it or conducted for that purpose, so it is with feeling and any simple scale of evaluation. Those scales can be useful, but they do not define the goal of the reasoning.


----------



## HandiAce (Nov 27, 2009)

You make assumptions about people's social cues and behavior rather than actually finding out how people truly feel.


----------



## Abraxas (May 28, 2011)

LiquidLight said:


> To say Feeling just evaluates good/bad would be a very primitive way of looking at feeling. That might be the case for someone with a very unconscious inferior feeling function where their experience of the feeling function is almost more like a gut-reaction than high differentiation, but I think Hillman's analogy of Feeling being the rationale of the heart which the mind does not understand is probably more appropriate. Something like mood or appropriateness or timeliness might also be the role of the feeling function as is knowing when to hold back or let someone have it (again one of the reasons why Thinking types are often stereotyped for being bad at all these things). But this goes above and beyond simple like/dislike or good and bad. Those would be very, very rudimentary ways of employing the feeling function. True to the essence of the function, but not the sumtotal of it.


Right.

It would be like reducing Thinking down to just "true/false" or "yes/no".

Thinking is obviously more complicated than just binary, even if binary is the most simplistic reduction of it.

In fact, I tend to view all of the Jungian functions in that way.

... the more _*differentiated*_ the function consciously becomes, the more complex the behavior and conceptualizations regarding it. The more unconscious of a function a person is, the less differentiated that function is to that person, and so not only is the way in which they express it "primitive" as Jung puts it, but also in the way that they experience it - it appears to them in a primitive and simple way, expressing itself _to_ them that way, which accounts for the way it gets devalued and is generally ignored by the individual.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

I know it's a bit painful to admit, but honestly, Fi types pretty much are narcissistic evaluators (I don't mean the term negatively though, even though it might be viewed as such by Fe types). What they like is what they would most like in themselves on some rather subjective level that probably DOES NOT account for the entire object, but some essential part of it that to them abstractly embodies the whole up to a certain subjective ideal they have.


----------



## LadyO.W.BernieBro (Sep 4, 2010)

l don't look into Fi vs Fe too much but even with my own Ti l can see that l don't fully comprehend another person's thoughts. That's not to say anyone does or that even Te does, but it does seem more genuinely interested. 

l don't like debates(aside from occassional troll debates) because l don't actually absorb information from speaking with another person that way, my natural tendency is to think my thoughts are initially the most important and l have to put in effort to understand someone else's.

l do put in the effort to do this because l think it's only fair, but it's not something that happens in the moment. l have to reflect on it, use the other functions and really try to understand why the other person's thoughts matter. Even if l know what they might be thinking which l often do, my own thoughts reign supreme.

So l wouldn't necessarily use the word narcissistic to describe Fi or Ti but my Ti is certainly self-serving and l easily and automatically filter out opinions and thoughts from other people, and often choose to believe that they think the same way l do, Fe must be the function that causes me to reevaluate this.


----------

