# Ti vs. Ni



## Chesire Tower

*What's the difference? I was convinced that I had to be a thinking type because I analyze everything to death. I see the connection between different things, evaluate them and if logically viable, I incorporate it as part of an internal framework.*

I know that I heavily use Ti but I also use Ni. I have no idea whether or not I use Fi/Fe but I believe I have a pretty high EQ; so that would lead me to be a INFJ or an INTP with highly developed Fe/Fi?.

I know that INTPs use Ne not Ni but I also utilize that as well. I've ruled out INTJ since I suck at organizing things and I'm far too logical to be an INFP. That leaves INTP or INFJ.

According to a thread I read on this forum; Jung believes in two auxiliaries not an auxiliary and a tertiary like Myers-Briggs. 

I know that I use some combination of N/T/F more than Si. I also think that Se is my inferior function since I tend to get disoriented when stressed; although stress is usually brought on by emotional upheavals and or a lack of sufficient privacy..

I am extremely curious, open-minded, somewhat of a slob and I'm frequently late for everything but I like making definitive plans in advance so I can prepare for them and always feel better once I've made a decision. I don't deal well with unexpected changes unless I'm the one who made them.


----------



## nonnaci

I like the way Van der hoop describes how intuition presents itself as a spontaneous and complete psychic content in the sense that the content is not readily derivable from other conscious objects. When intuition is directed inward, it sums of psychic event in the form of images. Thinking and feeling are allowed so long as they don't interfere with the spontaneity of intuition as intuition is always seeking to escape the current circumstances. 

Thinking on the other hand is an attempt to form an objective system used to classify products of sensation and intuition. The basic forms of classification are essentially passed down through the history of humanity and are learned. The introverted thinking adheres to it's own constructions from the basic premises that the forms have provided. Thus, sensation and intuition don't nearly have the same compelling force for reaction and impulse if they merely serve as mere products for classification. 

If thinking serves intuition, then what often comes up is thinking being used to justify or validate intuitions. If thinking was dominant, than intuition would only serve to form new conceptual categories.


----------



## QrivaN

Have you considered ISTP?


----------



## Aquarian

Speaking as a Ni-dom whose Ti plays an important and distinctive role in a cycle of perception and understanding:

In my case:

Ni doesn't have words or word-based analyses for its perceptions. Its perceptions are very strong, but they often show up at the gut level. My conscious mind processes Ni perceptions as a body-based "feel," as images and/or as something akin to sound or smell or touch.

Ti is all about conscious understanding. Ti wants to bring everything into conscious view in an analytical way. When Ti is active, not only _can_ I explain Ti insights in words or maps that are transparently accessible to my conscious mind - I have to do so. (explain to myself, at the very least, and often to others).

So where Ni perceptions take place outside of the conscious analytical mind, Ti lives in and "speaks from" that mind. Ni is like this huge bass-vibrating sphere with all these sensations inside of it, while Ti is conscious, crystal clear and very precise.

As Ni-dom/Ti-tert, I often find myself feeling something going on but unable to consciously understand it at first, and then it takes a while before I can bring it into analytical consciousness.

Ni perception doesn't require conscious understanding. At best, Ni perception can bypass the analytical mind and yield action responses at the reflex level, from the gut. At worst, Ni perception can yield sensations that are too diffuse (unsourced, imprecise in certain ways, etc) to understand as a guide for action.


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

Aquarian said:


> Speaking as a Ni-dom whose Ti plays an important and distinctive role in a cycle of perception and understanding:
> 
> In my case:
> 
> Ni doesn't have words or word-based analyses for its perceptions. Its perceptions are very strong, but they often show up at the gut level. My conscious mind processes Ni perceptions as a body-based "feel," as images and/or as something akin to sound or smell or touch.
> 
> Ti is all about conscious understanding. Ti wants to bring everything into conscious view in an analytical way. When Ti is active, not only _can_ I explain Ti insights in words or maps that are transparently accessible to my conscious mind - I have to do so. (explain to myself, at the very least, and often to others).
> 
> So where Ni perceptions take place outside of the conscious analytical mind, Ti lives in and "speaks from" that mind. Ni is like this huge bass-vibrating sphere with all these sensations inside of it, while Ti is conscious, crystal clear and very precise.
> 
> As Ni-dom/Ti-tert, I often find myself feeling something going on but unable to consciously understand it at first, and then it takes a while before I can bring it into analytical consciousness.
> 
> Ni perception doesn't require conscious understanding. At best, Ni perception can bypass the analytical mind and yield action responses at the reflex level, from the gut. At worst, Ni perception can yield sensations that are too diffuse (unsourced, imprecise in certain ways, etc) to understand as a guide for action.


 @NichirenWarrior

What Aquarian described as Ti being "conscious" and Ni not being so, is the difference between rational (Judging; Ti/Fe,Te/Fi) and irrational (perceiving; Si/Ne, Ni/Se) functions.


----------



## Aquarian

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> @_NichirenWarrior_
> 
> What Aquarian described as Ti being "conscious" and Ni not being so, is the difference between rational (Judging; Ti/Fe,Te/Fi) and irrational (perceiving; Si/Ne, Ni/Se) functions.


It's always annoyed me that the distinction is named as irrational versus rational. I wish it was called something else - it's distracting for me. /tangent


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

Aquarian said:


> It's always annoyed me that the distinction is named as irrational versus rational. I wish it was called something else - it's distracting for me. /tangent


It would be befitting if Fi wasn't called 'rational.' *shudders*


----------



## Aquarian

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> It would be befitting if Fi wasn't called 'rational.' *shudders*


For me, it would be fitting if Ni wasn't called irrational. Ni is the wisest part of my cognitive processes - hands down. Fe is freaking _insane_ a lot of the time because the world around me is freaking insane so its collective values are generally batsh*t crazy. Ti is pretty reasonable/rational, but only because it generally respects Ni wisdom.

I hope this isn't derailing! Fun little sub-dialogue.


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

Aquarian said:


> For me, it would be fitting if Ni wasn't called irrational. Ni is the wisest part of my cognitive processes - hands down. Fe is freaking _insane_ a lot of the time because the world around me is freaking insane so its collective values are generally batsh*t crazy. Ti is pretty reasonable/rational, but only because it generally respects Ni wisdom.
> 
> I hope this isn't derailing! Fun little sub-dialogue.


I use Ti just fine without Ni. 

Ni is irrational because it is simply perceiving the world, and very subjectively at that. It is not creating any assertions from the perceptions. Intuitively "knowing" something sure as hell doesn't mean you're right and definitely doesn't equal wisdom.

Basically, perception = observance
judging = inference

Yeah, that works.


----------



## NighTi

I'll second what @Aquarian wrote. We have the same type and the same experience. On the other hand, I quite like Jung's "irrational" label. Strip it of the negative connotation and it does a very good job of answering @NichirenWarrior's original question. Ni is immediate and defies rational analysis or organization. In this way, it's exactly like Se. Se perceives "yellow!" or "hot!" These impressions carry no judgment. They just are.

Of course, Si and Ne are no more rational but I think that Se makes the better example because everyone seems to understand its immediate and raw nature. There's a lot of confusion out there about Ni, Ne, and Si. I think much of the confusion arises because we try to make Jung's theory broader and more complicated than it is.


----------



## Aquarian

NighTi said:


> I'll second what @_Aquarian_ wrote. We have the same type and the same experience. On the other hand, I quite like Jung's "irrational" label. Strip it of the negative connotation and it does a very good job of answering @_NichirenWarrior_'s original question. Ni is immediate and defies rational analysis or organization.* In this way, it's exactly like Se. Se perceives "yellow!" or "hot!" These impressions carry no judgment. They just are*.


So let me ask you something. Se can perceive pain and pleasure via nerve endings etc - as, for me, can Ni via its version of sense-perception. 

What's the difference between cognitive _judgement_ and, say, jerking a finger off a burner because not only is it hot, but it HURTS? (this has always been a frustration for me with descriptions of perceiving functions).


----------



## Figure

Ti is generally described as involving an emphasis on categories, classifications, point to point logic, and internal consistency. People who prefer Ti tend to assess the information around them through these thought structures, sorting information through in a way that satisfies the structure's principles. 

Ni isn't an assessment, it is an emphasis on abstract hunches that converge onto a single concept. People who prefer Ni tend to not care as much about actual rote logic or facts unless they support this hunch/process or lead to the creation of a new one. The end result of Ni thinking is usually only part way through what the person is really trying to communicate. There is a tendency to rely on images, models, and symbolics as a way of nudging you to see the same hunch, since it often evades words. There is a constant flux to the function as a dominant because it is always bringing in new information, making it seem evasive and "deep." 

To crack the code of your type when these are the two functions at stake, you'll need to determine whether your primary mode is to assess or perceive.


----------



## Aquarian

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> I use Ti just fine without Ni.


What's your function stack? (I'm wondering if you're saying you don't have Ni in the upper 4 - and also wondering what perceiving function you do have in the dom or aux position)


----------



## PaladinX

Aquarian said:


> So let me ask you something. Se can perceive pain and pleasure via nerve endings etc - as, for me, can Ni via its version of sense-perception.
> 
> What's the difference between cognitive _judgement_ and, say, jerking a finger off a burner because not only is it hot, but it HURTS? (this has always been a frustration for me with descriptions of perceiving functions).


In this example, there is no judgment (for most people). It is an instant reaction. There is a short circuit path in the brain that gets used for these types of reactions. They tend to bypass cognition.

In my case, however, I tend not to recognize those sensations as immediately as 'normal' people do. When I feel it though, the reaction is instant, but is usually too late. This is due to sensory processing disorder/autistic spectrum disorder, at least for me.


----------



## Chesire Tower

nonnaci said:


> I like the way Van der hoop describes how intuition presents itself as a spontaneous and complete psychic content in the sense that the content is not readily derivable from other conscious objects. When intuition is directed inward, it sums of psychic event in the form of images. Thinking and feeling are allowed so long as they don't interfere with the spontaneity of intuition as intuition is always seeking to escape the current circumstances.
> 
> Thinking on the other hand is an attempt to form an objective system used to classify products of sensation and intuition. The basic forms of classification are essentially passed down through the history of humanity and are learned. The introverted thinking adheres to it's own constructions from the basic premises that the forms have provided. Thus, sensation and intuition don't nearly have the same compelling force for reaction and impulse if they merely serve as mere products for classification.
> 
> *If thinking serves intuition, then what often comes up is thinking being used to justify or validate intuitions. If thinking was dominant, than intuition would only serve to form new conceptual categories*.


Interesting; I think I would describe my process of getting an idea in my head - whether from external sources or from my imagination, then analyzing it for logical inconsistencies, and then if the idea passes the logic test, I then determine if it fits an aesthetic and ethical world view that is clear to me but difficult to explain. Thus, I get an idea, logically analyze it and then supposition it against my internal framework. However, I also logically analyze everything in sight. In a "thinker" thread, I saw a post that went something like this: " You know you're a thinker when your response to someone else's viewpoint is: 'but why (not) it doesn't make any sense'". This has been my _de facto_ response since childhood to anyone or any situation that wanted to convince me of something.


----------



## Chesire Tower

@Quiver , no why?



Aquarian said:


> Speaking as a Ni-dom whose Ti plays an important and distinctive role in a cycle of perception and understanding:
> 
> In my case:
> 
> Ni doesn't have words or word-based analyses for its perceptions. Its perceptions are very strong, but they often show up at the gut level. My conscious mind processes Ni perceptions as a body-based "feel," as images and/or as something akin to sound or smell or touch.
> 
> Ti is all about conscious understanding. Ti wants to bring everything into conscious view in an analytical way. When Ti is active, not only _can_ I explain Ti insights in words or maps that are transparently accessible to my conscious mind - I have to do so. (explain to myself, at the very least, and often to others).
> 
> So where Ni perceptions take place outside of the conscious analytical mind, Ti lives in and "speaks from" that mind. Ni is like this huge bass-vibrating sphere with all these sensations inside of it, while Ti is conscious, crystal clear and very precise.
> 
> *As Ni-dom/Ti-tert, I often find myself feeling something going on but unable to consciously understand it at first, and then it takes a while before I can bring it into analytical consciousness.*
> 
> Ni perception doesn't require conscious understanding. At best, Ni perception can bypass the analytical mind and yield action responses at the reflex level, from the gut. At worst, Ni perception can yield sensations that are too diffuse (unsourced, imprecise in certain ways, etc) to understand as a guide for action.


I often have hunches, feelings that seem to come out of nowhere about persons, places, situations, etc. For example, I was speaking to this person awhile ago. He seemed really nice on the surface but something was just _off_ about him. I couldn't put it into words at the time but my hunch was telling me that the image of himself that he wanted me to see didn't quite jibe which was underneath. I was able to revisit the conversation I had with him and single in on logical inconsistencies in the things he had said to me. A few weeks later, my "confusion" was cleared up because in response to a perfectly innocent question I had asked him; he basically flipped out, yelled at me and threw out all sorts of irrational and paranoid accusations at me; thus, my hunch was validated.

I have also confused Fi with Ni for that reason.


----------



## Aquarian

NichirenWarrior said:


> I often have hunches, feelings that seem to come out of nowhere about persons, places, situations, etc. For example, I was speaking to this person awhile ago. He seemed really nice on the surface but something was just _off_ about him. I couldn't put it into words at the time but my hunch was telling me that the image of himself that he wanted me to see didn't quite jibe which was underneath. I was able to revisit the conversation I had with him and single in on logical inconsistencies in the things he had said to me. A few weeks later, my "confusion" was cleared up because in response to a perfectly innocent question I had asked him; he basically flipped out, yelled at me and threw out all sorts of irrational and paranoid accusations at me; thus, my hunch was validated.


Sounds a lot like Ni to me, is that your assessment as well?



> I have also confused Fi with Ni for that reason.


I don't understand this at all - why would Fi do this?


----------



## Chesire Tower

@ThatOneWeirdGuy , I actually _am_ very aware when I have these "hunches" and I am bothered by them until I can find a way of rationally explaining them.
@NighTi , I don't agree that my hunches "carry no judgement". When they don't make sense to me; I obsess about finding away to logically explain them. In the example I gave to @Aquarian in an above post, I instinctively felt that there was something "off" or not right about an impression I was getting from someone. I would consider that to _be_ a judgment. 
@Aquarian , Could you explain Fe to me?; I have trouble differentiating it from Fi. Thank you for explaining Ni to me because I not only had it confused with Ti; I also had it confused with Fi.



Figure said:


> Ti is generally described as involving an emphasis on categories, classifications, point to point logic, and internal consistency. People who prefer Ti tend to assess the information around them through these thought structures, sorting information through in a way that satisfies the structure's principles.
> 
> Ni isn't an assessment, it is an emphasis on abstract hunches that converge onto a single concept. People who prefer Ni tend to not care as much about actual rote logic or facts unless they support this hunch/process or lead to the creation of a new one. The end result of Ni thinking is usually only part way through what the person is really trying to communicate. There is a tendency to rely on images, models, and symbolics as a way of nudging you to see the same hunch, since it often evades words. There is a constant flux to the function as a dominant because it is always bringing in new information, making it seem evasive and "deep."
> 
> *To crack the code of your type when these are the two functions at stake, you'll need to determine whether your primary mode is to assess or perceive*.


This is where I get confused. I have a problem with intuitions that cannot be logically validated and conversely, I also have problems with logical analysis that doesn't quite feel right to me. IOW, I have to _both_ know in my gut the truth about something but I will reject it if my perception about that "something" doesn't survive a logical _and_ an *objective* assessment.

For example, let's say that after a conversation I have with someone, I have a "bad feeling" about it but can't understand why. I could have picked up some inconsistent "vibe" from that other person or I could have superimposed my own insecurities or be triggered by some past trauma. Thus, what's the _root_ of that bad feeling? In order to figure it out, I need to view the context of this bad feeling *objectively*. I have to get rid of any *subjective contamination *of my perception of the context. Once I do that, then I can logically and rationally determine whether or not I ought to be concerned about of where the origins of this bad feeling lead me to. 

OTOH, I may encounter a situation that at first may not make logically sense to me or in fact I may perceive it as unreasonable but nevertheless for reasons I cannot yet explain; it *feels right *to me for some reason. If I detach myself from the situation and examine it later after some reflection - which my or may not involve receiving more information; I will eventually come to realise that my initial perception was off or conversely, that my initial assessment was logically faulty.


----------



## Aquarian

NichirenWarrior said:


> @_NighTi_ , I don't agree that my hunches "carry no judgement". When they don't make sense to me; I obsess about finding away to logically explain them. In the example I gave to @_Aquarian_ in an above post, I instinctively felt that there was something "off" or not right about an impression I was getting from someone. I would consider that to _be_ a judgment.


Here's a thought. Maybe cognitive function theory is limited by a limited understanding of how the "second brain" works in human bodies. Even the stuff I've seen on the matter seems woefully limited in its understanding. I would see this as a culturally-sourced problem in scientific comprehension of how the human organism works (but I'm not an expert and so it's more something I would put out as speculation to be further assessed apart from what I can bring to the table)



> @_Aquarian_ , Could you explain Fe to me?; I have trouble differentiating it from Fi. Thank you for explaining Ni to me because I not only had it confused with Ti; I also had it confused with Fi.


Fe places a high value/validity on external value systems. So in my case: I'm generally attending to the external (to me) value systems operating in groups, organizations, cultural systems etc. I don't simply adopt and follow this external material (that's a stereotype of Fe and of course I'm not Fe-dom). But I attend to it, Fe places a high initial validity on it, and under certain circumstances I can internalize this material to some extent for limited time periods and even begin to see myself through the eyes of the external value system at the same time as being myself and seeing through my own eyes (probably less relevant note: In my case, there's a whole cycle that happens with Ni-Fe-Ti that I don't know is relevant to others with the Ni-Fe-Ti-Se configuration).

In very stark contrast, Fi isn't concerned about _external_ value systems. Fi places a high value/validity on the individual Fi user's own internal value system or matrix. 

I can't describe Fi from inside of it, but I feel like I see the contrast all the time in the difference between my Fi-dom mate and myself/Fe-aux. She's basically like: "This is me, this is what I believe, that's it" whereas I'm taking in external information about what is acceptable in a particular group or environment and sort of negotiating or mediating the terrain between my own self and the environmental tone, energy, norms, values. 

So for example take job interviews. My mate's approach is just being flat-out herself and basically stating her own individual values - this works when there's a good fit between her individual values and what they're looking for (or what they believe they're looking for at least). I, on the other hand, tend to be reading the cues given by interviewers and adapting my tone and energy in-process. It's not that I lack a center - I really do have clear skills and quite strong perspectives and approaches to my work. But even so, I'm more externally focused, looking to understand and communicate how that might (or might not) fit with what they're seeking. Whereas my mate is more of a simple "this is me, these re my values - totally up to you to decide if I fit" kind of interviewee.

Does that help at all in your efforts to get at the Fe-Fi difference?


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy

NichirenWarrior said:


> @_ThatOneWeirdGuy_ , I actually _am_ very aware when I have these "hunches" and I am bothered by them until I can find a way of rationally explaining them.
> 
> @_NighTi_ , I don't agree that my hunches "carry no judgement". When they don't make sense to me; I obsess about finding away to logically explain them. In the example I gave to @_Aquarian_ in an above post, I instinctively felt that there was something "off" or not right about an impression I was getting from someone. I would consider that to _be_ a judgment.
> 
> @_Aquarian_ , Could you explain Fe to me?; I have trouble differentiating it from Fi. Thank you for explaining Ni to me because I not only had it confused with Ti; I also had it confused with Fi.
> 
> 
> 
> This is where I get confused. I have a problem with intuitions that cannot be logically validated and conversely, I also have problems with logical analysis that doesn't quite feel right to me. IOW, I have to _both_ know in my gut the truth about something but I will reject it if my perception about that "something" doesn't survive a logical _and_ an *objective* assessment.
> 
> For example, let's say that after a conversation I have with someone, I have a "bad feeling" about it but can't understand why. I could have picked up some inconsistent "vibe" from that other person or I could have superimposed my own insecurities or be triggered by some past trauma. Thus, what's the _root_ of that bad feeling? In order to figure it out, I need to view the context of this bad feeling *objectively*. I have to get rid of any *subjective contamination *of my perception of the context. Once I do that, then I can logically and rationally determine whether or not I ought to be concerned about of where the origins of this bad feeling lead me to.
> 
> OTOH, I may encounter a situation that at first may not make logically sense to me or in fact I may perceive it as unreasonable but nevertheless for reasons I cannot yet explain; it *feels right *to me for some reason. If I detach myself from the situation and examine it later after some reflection - which my or may not involve receiving more information; I will eventually come to realise that my initial perception was off or conversely, that my initial assessment was logically faulty.


Okay, so you're no pure Ni/Se and have judging functions in your aux/tert. Or the JCF isn't flawless. Or both. 



Aquarian said:


> What's your function stack? (I'm wondering if you're saying you don't have Ni in the upper 4 - and also wondering what perceiving function you do have in the dom or aux position)


As said in my signature, TiNe, meaning Ti/Fe in dom/inferior and Ne/Si in aux/tert. 

As for the "shadow functions," I'd put Se last as a blindspot, Fi second to last as something I viciously oppose, and Ni and Te in 5th or 6th; either order.


----------



## Chesire Tower

sentilopis said:


> I believe function preferences would show themselves when the individual is under pressure.
> 
> People with better Ti are very good at elaborating the intricate points of an argument in real time.
> 
> *Infjs will have trouble making that analysis when presenting in a time constrained formula, resulting in them communicating in broad Fe strokes, which to some types, sound like big time ass-pulls.*


It would be really helpful to me if you could illustrate the specific differences in how an INTP were to communicate their analysis vs. an INFJ in "a time constrained formula".


----------



## Vaka

NichirenWarrior said:


> Could you please elaborate further on this? You have "unknown personality" in your profile; is that because you are wrestling with the same reasons for your type confusion as myself? It sounds as if you are leaning towards my being an INTP? Would that be correct?


I'm an INTP. I thought I was an INFJ maybe a year ago or so for similar reasons, but not anymore. People think I'm an INFP sometimes, but I'm not one of them either


----------



## sentilopis

NichirenWarrior said:


> It would be really helpful to me if you could illustrate the specific differences in how an INTP were to communicate their analysis vs. an INFJ in "a time constrained formula".


INTPs I know tend to keep to themselves, hardly see them ruffled, so less chance to see them in "time constrained formats."

But on secondary Ti, I have an ENTP international law instuctor, when under a rushed class schedule, you'll see his eyes disengage looking downward, and hear him elaborate whole structures of legal concepts, their supporting statutes and ramifications, which will leave us way behind eating his dust; after finishing, his eyes will engage again, and give that mischievous smile, asking us "again?".

My instructor on constitutional law is INFJ, the class is fairly large, so he seems to have trouble locking on to a specific person to communicate(INFJs play on the subject's feedback), which leads to him being a bit disorientated in his teaching, sometimes just going into Se desperation mode and spurting irrelevant facts to boost his arguments. He is very good at 1 on 1 tutoring though, good at leading discussions and gladly does overtime to help others learn.


----------



## Chesire Tower

TreasureTower said:


> CognitiveTypes - YouTube


It's interesting now, that I really think that I actually understand the functions; I have come to the conclusion that I must in fact be an INFJ. I think the problem before that I really didn't understand what Ni was and I wasn't nurturing it properly.

http://personalitycafe.com/whats-my-personality-type/158882-solution-inxproblem.html

After reading about the various functions and type descriptions; something totally amazing about everything I had read, just clicked in my head, and it occurred to me that I am Ni - have always been Ni but was unhappy because I was neglecting it. For me, experiencing my Ni was the greatest experience ever. It was about so much more than type theory could ever be. Realizing that I am an INFJ has made my entire life make sense to me. After my profound revelation - which I still cannot put into words; I now completely understand what N doms like @Aquarian mean when they - seemingly out of nowhere - have that thrilling "A-ha" moment.

The truth is that I have always used Ni; I just didn't realize it; I just thought I was wasting my time daydreaming. I think that our sensing dominant society discourages both Ne/Ni but especially Ni as an effective and reliable source of information; that you're much more likely to try to hide it - assuming you can even recognise it -, than embrace it; if you really don't understand exactly what it is. Before JCF and MBTI, I think I was terrified of my Ni and wanted to somehow "justify" it by turning it into T - bastardising Ni in an attempt to logically define it and not valuing it for what it was. I mean I do still use Ti but that is not my main function. I can try to futilely extract all of the info I want from Ti/Fe and never really understand why I was so unhappy. When I had my "Ni-gasm" yesterday; it was the most awesome thing ever. I had always believed that I needed art or a relationship to experience this but all I really have to do; is to trust my own instincts.


----------



## LadyO.W.BernieBro

Now l want to be an INFJ just so l can come out the Ni closet and get my freak on.

Congrats @TreasureTower :kitteh:

l hadn't thought about it in terms of preferring a thinking function personally, but l do think Ne is preferable to many people and on top of that, Ni can be so difficult to understand that some people abandon it prematurely OR...''don't want to be J's'' :mellow:


----------



## Emerson

I'll give my perception of Ni since it's too subjective to make meaningful statements in genera about it. 

It comes across initially as a feeling of something big brewing inside me like a wave swelling. If you used Ni you'd know. 

It's why INXJ's are so confident about it.


----------



## LadyO.W.BernieBro

Emerson said:


> I'll give my perception of Ni since it's too subjective to make meaningful statements in genera about it.
> 
> It comes across initially as a feeling of something big brewing inside me like a wave swelling. If you used Ni you'd know.
> 
> It's why INXJ's are so confident about it.


l couldn't identify potential signs of Ni in myself, _remotely_ until l spoke more with INFJ's. 

lt still isn't as if l have complete access to what's happening inside of an INFJ, but it was easier to relate to on a surface level.

l've been close with several INTJ's and the Fi could be isolating, extremely intense, and sometimes difficult to be around. l experience this with (some) INFP's too. l can only imagine it feels like something is brewing inside of them because it's very obvious outwardly.

l do think INFJ's are very skilled at maintaining different emotional states more in sync with the environment and experience Ni the same way, obviously, but l do question how easily an INTJ will separate their own Ni from Fi.


----------



## Chesire Tower

OMG WTF BRO said:


> Now l want to be an INFJ just so l can come out the Ni closet and get my freak on.
> 
> Congrats @TreasureTower :kitteh:
> 
> l hadn't thought about it in terms of preferring a thinking function personally, but l do think Ne is preferable to many people and on top of that, Ni can be so difficult to understand that some people abandon it prematurely OR...''don't want to be J's'' :mellow:


:laughing:

Exactly!, I always devalued it because just thought it was me losing touch with reality rather than developing profound insights. In fact, the only times I _consciously _ used it was when I would get so down and hopeless because my Ti/Fe reasoning kept firing blanks and it was used as a last resort in its "pure" form. I was always using it but smothering it with Fe/Ti and not allowing it to just be and develop on its own. The only times, I would do that was either in the presence of art or nature or in relationships; so of course, I believed that I couldn't access my Ni in its purest form without the right external circumstances. My apartment looks a bit like a museum - albeit a messy one, lol. I have all kinds of art everywhere to stimulate my Ni; it just wasn't something that I was consciously aware of.

I wonder how many unidentified INXJs there are in the world, who either aren't aware of or devalue their Ni; as I had. There's no question, that I have been so much happier to have realized that what I had previously thought might be a possible form of insanity, could actually be my salvation. I also think that's why I mistook Ne for Ni. I was always looking outward to other people, ideas or things to get my inspiration from but I would always obsessively analyze it before, really taking the time the time to observe and access it; so perhaps I was Ti/Fe abusing my Ni and I never before understood _why_; I just kept on going in circles. It's like I've been in some sort of psychological cage and I just found the key.

I read somewhere that some people mistake their auxiliary or teritary function as their dom - especially if their first function is Ni and to a lesser extent Ne or Si. In our Se dom society, any information that is not perceived with the five senses is not taken seriously. Because I was always fighting my Ni, it was more frightening than anything else; I would sometimes experience a sense of depersonalization. Now that I see it as a positive things; as a vital life energy; I am no longer afraid but eagerly welcome its presence.


----------



## Chesire Tower

Emerson said:


> I'll give my perception of Ni since it's too subjective to make meaningful statements in genera about it.
> 
> *It comes across initially as a feeling of something big brewing inside me like a wave swelling*. If you used Ni you'd know.
> 
> It's why INXJ's are so confident about it.


That's what I experienced in a nutshell the other day but for possibly the first time; I didn't jump to analyze it in anyway and allowed it to percolate. I never before realized how my prejudice towards Ni had been blinding me and robbing me of my true essence.



OMG WTF BRO said:


> l couldn't relate with Ni _remotely_ until l spoke more with INFJ's.
> 
> lt still isn't as if l have complete access to what's happening inside of an INFJ, but it was easier to relate to on a surface level.
> 
> l've been close with several INTJ's and the Fi *could be isolating, extremely intense, and sometimes difficult to be around*. l experience this with (some) INFP's too. l can only imagine it feels like something is brewing inside of them because it's very obvious outwardly.
> 
> l do think INFJ's are very skilled at maintaining different emotional states more in sync with the environment and experience Ni the same way, obviously, but l do question how easily an INTJ will separate their own Ni from Fi.


Actually, that's what happens when I experience Ni; I want to be left alone because outside interference gets in the way. I used to mistake my Ni for some form of extreme introversion - most likely due to the fact that I was always pushing it away rather than embracing it. I can honestly say; that no logical deduction or Ti-gasm compares to an Ni-gasm but Ti can be very helpful, once Ni has run its course and you've fully processed it. It's so reassuring to know that by giving my Ni full reign; I no longer have to live life as a disembodied mind.


----------



## LadyO.W.BernieBro

TreasureTower said:


> That's what I experienced in a nutshell the other day but for possibly the first time; I didn't jump to analyze it in anyway and allowed it to percolate. I never before realized how my prejudice towards Ni had been blinding me and robbing me of my true essence.
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, that's what happens when I experience Ni; I want to be left alone because outside interference gets in the way. I used to mistake my Ni for some form of extreme introversion - most likely due to the fact that I was always pushing it away rather than embracing it. I can honestly say; that no logical deduction or Ti-gasm compares to an Ni-gasm but Ti can be very helpful, once Ni has run its course and you've fully processed it. It's so reassuring to know that by giving my Ni full reign; I no longer have to live life as a disembodied mind.





Now l wonder if the INFPs l have typed are INFJ's.

l see that same Fi intensity online, though it is very hit-or-miss and likely dependent on several factors (development, emotional health).

Not quite as terrified by the INFJ's _yet_, l will hang around.


----------



## Emerson

OMG WTF BRO said:


> l couldn't identify potential signs of Ni in myself, _remotely_ until l spoke more with INFJ's.
> 
> lt still isn't as if l have complete access to what's happening inside of an INFJ, but it was easier to relate to on a surface level.
> 
> l've been close with several INTJ's and the Fi could be isolating, extremely intense, and sometimes difficult to be around. l experience this with (some) INFP's too. l can only imagine it feels like something is brewing inside of them because it's very obvious outwardly.
> 
> l do think INFJ's are very skilled at maintaining different emotional states more in sync with the environment and experience Ni the same way, obviously, but l do question how easily an INTJ will separate their own Ni from Fi.



With great difficulty, I've found this with myself and two other INTJ men I know, we went through various intense emotional periods in our early to mid teens where we would seem to be feelers of the highest order. The INTJ mind is not an organised one especially not in ones early days.


----------



## Chesire Tower

OMG WTF BRO said:


> Now l wonder if the INFPs l have typed are INFJ's.
> 
> l see that same Fi intensity online, though it is very hit-or-miss and likely dependent on several factors (development, emotional health).
> 
> Not quite as terrified by the INFJ's _yet_, l will hang around.













http://personalitycafe.com/whats-my-personality-type/158882-solution-inxproblem.html

This is one if my posts from that thread. INFPs used Ni as an auxiliary and it is extraverted; so they are probably a lot less afraid of it; than I would think that INXJs are of Ni.



TreasureTower said:


> After spending a lot of tine on Personality Junkie; I am convinced that I must be an INFJ.
> 
> I realised that despite my usage of Ne to some extant; I am in fact Ni dominant. I was confused by this because a lot of things interest me, but I like to explore one topic at a time, in depth. This likely explains why I did much better in my studies when I was able to focus on one or not more than two subjects at a time, and felt burnt out when I had to study many courses at once.
> 
> I also realised that I've confused Ti with Ni to some extant. They are both analytical and Ni believes that paradoxical ideas can sometimes go together; where as Ti seeks to differentiate between them, rather than pursue synthesis. It also explains my frustration with an INFP friend of mine who jumps from topic to topic; when I want to explore a single topic in more depth before I investigate another one. INFJs also prefer non-fiction to fiction, and they are good at expressing positive emotions; unlike INFPs who can seem cold. However, this more than anything convinced me:
> 
> INFJ-INTP Relationships & Compatibility: Part III: Challenges - Personality Junkie
> 
> I always thought their was something wrong with me in my difficulty engaging with the external environment. After reading everything; I've come to the conclusion that being an INFJ explains a hell of a lot. Although, I still do relate to INTP; it's extremely clear that I am one of them and now, I strongly lean towards INFJ.


I found their definitions to be the most extensive; I've come across anywhere.


----------



## Naama

Jungs idea of two aux functions wasnt about two 2nd functions, he just called 2nd and 3rd both auxiliary.

also this:



Aquarian said:


> Speaking as a Ni-dom whose Ti plays an important and distinctive role in a cycle of perception and understanding:
> 
> In my case:
> 
> Ni doesn't have words or word-based analyses for its perceptions. Its perceptions are very strong, but they often show up at the gut level. My conscious mind processes Ni perceptions as a body-based "feel," as images and/or as something akin to sound or smell or touch.
> 
> Ti is all about conscious understanding. Ti wants to bring everything into conscious view in an analytical way. When Ti is active, not only _can_ I explain Ti insights in words or maps that are transparently accessible to my conscious mind - I have to do so. (explain to myself, at the very least, and often to others).
> 
> So where Ni perceptions take place outside of the conscious analytical mind, Ti lives in and "speaks from" that mind. Ni is like this huge bass-vibrating sphere with all these sensations inside of it, while Ti is conscious, crystal clear and very precise.
> 
> As Ni-dom/Ti-tert, I often find myself feeling something going on but unable to consciously understand it at first, and then it takes a while before I can bring it into analytical consciousness.
> 
> Ni perception doesn't require conscious understanding. At best, Ni perception can bypass the analytical mind and yield action responses at the reflex level, from the gut. At worst, Ni perception can yield sensations that are too diffuse (unsourced, imprecise in certain ways, etc) to understand as a guide for action.


intuition is a perception via the unconscious processes, while thinking is rational analysis of reason


----------



## bearotter

@_TreasureTower_ even if you're sure about Ni over Ne, don't rule out ISTP -- Se can get diminished if Ni is over-used. I think a fair number of self-proclaimed Ni types may or may not be Ji-doms with Ni nurtured later in life and not really their primary perspective.


edit: but this isn't to say I think you're wrong about your type or anything. Just a valid other direction to think about if you find INFJ doesn't seem right to you.


----------



## bearotter

In line with/addition to what Naama writes about intuition, this is sort of why functionally, many introverted Ni sorts will look to something like the Fe or Te perspective to rationalize and provide a shape/form to their perceptions partly as a form of exploration and partly out of necessity of reconciling with objective contents. Part of the reason for this is Ni has suppressed awareness of the irrationalized sensory contents that may have been connected to its musings, and my theory is at least some outwardly "J"-like behavior (I will never claim "all" because cognitive type is not directly connected in my understanding to these 4 dimensions) is simply an avoidance of the inferior perspective. This of course isn't to say that they may not "prefer" or invest more energy in an introverted judgment.


----------



## Aquarian

bearotter said:


> In line with/addition to what Naama writes about intuition, this is sort of why functionally, many introverted Ni sorts will look to something like the Fe or Te perspective to rationalize and provide a shape/form to their perceptions partly as a form of exploration and partly out of necessity of reconciling with objective contents.


This - trying to use Fe to give shape/form to Ni perception - has been one of the most seemingly necessary and most destructive (in a bad way) patterns in my life.


----------



## Ballast

Emerson said:


> With great difficulty, I've found this with myself and two other INTJ men I know, we went through various intense emotional periods in our early to mid teens where we would seem to be feelers of the highest order. The INTJ mind is not an organised one especially not in ones early days.


Ha! That sounds familiar.



OMG WTF BRO said:


> l couldn't identify potential signs of Ni in myself, _remotely_ until l spoke more with INFJ's.
> 
> lt still isn't as if l have complete access to what's happening inside of an INFJ, but it was easier to relate to on a surface level.
> 
> l've been close with several INTJ's and the Fi could be isolating, extremely intense, and sometimes difficult to be around. l experience this with (some) INFP's too. l can only imagine it feels like something is brewing inside of them because it's very obvious outwardly.
> 
> l do think INFJ's are very skilled at maintaining different emotional states more in sync with the environment and experience Ni the same way, obviously, but l do question how easily an INTJ will separate their own Ni from Fi.


Yeah, it can be hard to tell. I find that I go through a process of trying to rationalize, explain, justify, or make sense of my feelings and values. I also find that while my values are felt on the personal level I do feel a need to make them universal or to tap into some larger external system to validate them. That's where the J comes in. If I have a value, I naturally hold everyone else to that standard as well. 

But what it's really about is trying to justify (rationalize) both my perceptive insights and my Fi. It's never enough for me that I simply _feel_ things or _perceive_ them. They have to be consistent, external, objective, or rational on some level. If I feel anger, I don't think my anger is valid unless it seems justified and universally applicable, in the sense that I think the wrongdoing was Wrong whether I did it or the other party did. I don't take a thing to be true by virtue of the fact that I _felt_ it or that my brain burbled it out anymore. I used to when I was younger. It's safe to say that I had a much firmer grasp on both introverted functions back then, and then the Te really started to kick in.


----------

