# Ne-doms, what does Ne look like?



## Empathic (Jul 5, 2016)

I'm trying to get a clearer picture of Ne, and would like to see it in action for Ne-doms. I'm looking for specific examples.

I'm aware that Ne can be described as exploring possibilities, brainstorming, cross-contextualizing and so on. I'm also aware of Ne descriptions by Jung and those by Nardi, Thomson, etc., and metaphors describing Ne like a supernova. But I still find Ne to be slightly elusive.

Can you describe what it's like to use Ne when you go through your environment, and provide a short account of that? For example, when you look at a tree outside, what goes through your mind?


----------



## Kaboomz (Jun 14, 2016)

tree...lemon...ade...shoes...clogs...poland (sorry denmark), sex (crush in work) construction site, bob the builder, hammer...kids...cannabalism...strawberries...yoghurt...fridge...breakfast...brb


----------



## VagrantFarce (Jul 31, 2015)




----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

VagrantFarce said:


>


Do you think he's an Ne dom? Because I think he's an ESFJ so idk if he's really a genuinely good example to use. Nardi imo despite his self typing is an ENTP though.


----------



## VagrantFarce (Jul 31, 2015)

Entropic said:


> Do you think he's an Ne dom?


Yeah. Like, _yeah_. 

But I won't debate that - as far as I'm concerned, nothing demonstrates the idea of Ne more clearly than Robin Williams doing stand-up.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

VagrantFarce said:


> Yeah. Like, _yeah_.
> 
> But I won't debate that - as far as I'm concerned, nothing demonstrates the idea of Ne more clearly than Robin Williams doing stand-up.


Well I do think his standup is very affected by Ne but it's majorly Fe in a way. What exactly do you think is Ne about his standups?


----------



## Kaboomz (Jun 14, 2016)

VagrantFarce said:


> Yeah. Like, _yeah_.
> 
> But I won't debate that - as far as I'm concerned, nothing demonstrates the idea of Ne more clearly than Robin Williams doing stand-up.


yes. he's like bill hicks without the phlegmatic delivery

i mean...he takes a scarf and turns it into ten different comedy props. it's the definition of seeing lots of potential. your supernova of possibilities

he toys with language. he toys with his own psychic energy. he doesn't engage on an intellectual level, because that's just another prop to be toyed with. all just to make the point that he can't explain how or what he does. he can only demonstrate it, because it's intuitive

i would love him to be an esfj because it would shatter the stereotype that they lack depth and abstract thought, but he's an ENFP. 

Even russell brand, imo an ESFP, can come across as very intuitive due to his quick wit and verbosity, but he is still engaged with the real world. williams warps the real world






i'd love someone to give an example of esfj humor btw. sfj's are quite enigmatic ime

(totally debating this for you)


----------



## VagrantFarce (Jul 31, 2015)

Entropic said:


> What exactly do you think is Ne about his standups?


His stand-up is a whirlwind of open-ended, associative thinking.


----------



## Empathic (Jul 5, 2016)

Kaboomz said:


> tree...lemon...ade...shoes...clogs...poland (sorry denmark), sex (crush in work) construction site, bob the builder, hammer...kids...cannabalism...strawberries...yoghurt...fridge...breakfast...brb


I've seen Ne chains of thought like this before. It's like word association. But would you come up with a similar thought chain had you actually looked at a tree outside, rather than just thinking of the word "tree" as written here? Can you explain the links between the associations - for example, how did you get from lemonade to shoes?

Also, in contrast to association chains like these, I've also seen that Ne users can generate possibilities related with things instead. For example, coming up with numerous uses for a chair. How come some Ne chains jump from topic to topic, while some Ne chains seem like focused brainstorming?



Entropic said:


> Do you think [Robin Williams] is an Ne dom? Because I think he's an ESFJ so idk if he's really a genuinely good example to use. Nardi imo despite his self typing is an ENTP though.


I also think Robin Williams strikes me as ESFJ. ESxJs can have quite an active tertiary Ne, other examples being Letterman/Alex Trebek who are ESTJs, where their profession involves use of Ne a lot, such as in acting that requires spontaneity such as improv and talk show hosting. An ENTP example would be Regis Philbin.

Also, Nardi is actually quite a textbook INTJ. I've known INTJs who make more expressive use of their Fi, but Nardi is quite pronounced with his use of Te.


----------



## Wiz (Apr 8, 2014)

It doesn't look like anything. It's too fast to observe for the naked eye!


----------



## Kaboomz (Jun 14, 2016)

Empathic said:


> I've seen Ne chains of thought like this before. It's like word association. But would you come up with a similar thought chain had you actually looked at a tree outside, rather than just thinking of the word "tree" as written here? Can you explain the links between the associations - for example, how did you get from lemonade to shoes?
> 
> Also, in contrast to association chains like these, I've also seen that Ne users can generate possibilities related with things instead. For example, coming up with numerous uses for a chair. How come some Ne chains jump from topic to topic, while some Ne chains seem like focused brainstorming?


it's hard to explain...it's like...if i look at a tree, a spider diagram pops up but it's not in focus because i'm not focused on the tree, it's just sensory data. imagine looking at a door and knowing that door could lead anywhere, but you're not going to open it so lending it mental energy is a waste. that's just walking down the street. it's not like everything i see explodes in a fairy fart of possibilities - it's just data. i see a tree as a tree, but in my mind's eye the spider diagram is like the psychic periphery and if i _focus on the tree_, i'll start frog jumping

with your example, because the tree was entirely imaginary, my mind instantly thought of lemons and went from there (prop cuz i hadnt had breakfast? who knows) but i mean i think everyone thinks like this to some extent. if i say brick, maybe you see a wall, or clay, or sediment, or a factory, or a cement mixer, or whatever. it's just associate thinking. the mind works like this. it's why meditation teaches focus, to curb the monkey mind from swinging from mental branch to mental branch

in terms of coming up with different uses. i do this for everything as the need arises. it's just improv. to me it's almost laziness, but people comment and say it's quite innovative. like, i fixed my headphones and in the process created a strap for my hoodie using a paper clip. it's so small and silly, but it's just having a problem, and fixing it with whatever you have at hand. 

like...erm...haha i'm looking around my room for a problem :| shit i dunno. i need to be motivated to actually see it. otherwise it's just imaginary like the tree. well ok i'll use the chair as an example! i mean you can use it as a chair, a stool, a hangar, turn it upside down and use it for....see now i need a problem that the chair solves. that's the thing. unless i have some data to fuel Ne, it just runs dry because i don't see the point of entertaining the billions of things i could stick on the legs of a chair. practicality fuels possibility, not vice versa imo

if you give me data, like, you want the chair to be used IN something, or you have a problem you need SOLVED, then i'm your man...but asking me to look at a chair and describe what i could do with it is like asking someone to go outside annd count raindrops in a storm. i wouldn't know where to start


----------



## Empathic (Jul 5, 2016)

Ne-doms, if you could post short accounts of your Ne use in action like the following, that would be great. This was posted by an ENFP elsewhere:



> I am walking down the stairs with my headphones on. I am listening to a song with slow, croning singer, and I think his voice sounds kind of like a zombie. I see the tiles on the kitchen floor beneath me. I think of Tetris. With Fi, I consider how old video games contain puzzles like Tetris, while new video games contain zombies. I conclude that it is unfortunate. As I step into the kitchen, I see a cup on the counter. The day before, I had found a gigantic beetle in the street and I placed him in a cup. Another thing that happened the day before is I found a pair of sunglasses. I thought of this because they kind of made me look like John Lennon, the Beatle. I was wearing the same large headphones when I found them, and I thought of another time when much of my face was covered up. It was a few years ago at a protest. I had fairly large sunglasses on and my hood was up. I briefly thought of the Unibomber. With Fi, I was strained: I considered how I no longer hold the opinions that I did a few years ago, and how arrogant and dogmatic I was to protest. I thought of a friend who expressed similar regrets to me one time. I had actually accompanied him at this protest. We are both ENFPs, and I thought that Te, as it kicks in later, can really give an ENFP hard regrets. I thought of two other instances in which I had seen ENFPs behaving in a childish manner, and wondered how long it took for them to reflect and regret those situations. I thought about [the forum]. I considered making a thread on childishness, Te, and regret in ENFPs. I envisioned a literal piece of thread. It connected pictures of the several ENFP friends that I envisioned. It represented the 'ENFP.' I considered that in my mind, a piece of string representing ANY topic would be sewn through all situations and ideas concerning that topic that I could think of, whether real or imagined. This is a good visual representation of Ne, so I considered making a thread on Ne in general.
> 
> This train of thought took about fifteen seconds. My stairs lead directly into my kitchen. As I approached the cabinet where the cups were, I had to interact with my environment, so my train of thought ended there. I was sensually keen for only the few seconds I needed to open the cabinet and grab a cup, after which I receded into my thoughts again.
> 
> ...


This is an example of what I mean by an account of what it's like to use Ne when you go through an environment.

Otherwise, with the tree example, you could look outside at a tree. (Or if you're not near one or you need inspiration, you can take a look at the first tree image on Wikipedia for the "Tree" entry.) What goes through your mind?


----------



## Empathic (Jul 5, 2016)

Kaboomz said:


> if i look at a tree, a spider diagram pops up but it's not in focus because i'm not focused on the tree, it's just sensory data. imagine looking at a door and knowing that door could lead anywhere, but you're not going to open it so lending it mental energy is a waste. that's just walking down the street. it's not like everything i see explodes in a fairy fart of possibilities - it's just data. i see a tree as a tree, but in my mind's eye the spider diagram is like the psychic periphery and if i _focus on the tree_, i'll start frog jumping


A spider diagram - of connections? I've heard from some Ne-doms describing something like a web of connections that can change and develop depending on more fresh data coming in, but wasn't sure how literal the described web of connections actually is and how to interpret it. How does that work in your case - do you actually see like a spider diagram appearing around superimposed on what you're looking at in your environment or is it like some kind of internal mental image of connections like a mind map?



Kaboomz said:


> with your example, because the tree was entirely imaginary, my mind instantly thought of lemons and went from there (prop cuz i hadnt had breakfast? who knows) but i mean i think everyone thinks like this to some extent. if i say brick, maybe you see a wall, or clay, or sediment, or a factory, or a cement mixer, or whatever. it's just associate thinking. the mind works like this. it's why meditation teaches focus, to curb the monkey mind from swinging from mental branch to mental branch


I would think it's the case in general as well. Though in Ne descriptions of it in action, these chains tend to get mentioned a lot by Ne users themselves, and I've noticed that these chains can get quite quirky and cross-contextual. Like if the Ne user sees a dog and cat, they could think of two brothers, one more gregarious like a dog, and one more reserved like a cat, and then think of how if dogs and cats could write, how would their handwriting differ, and so on.



Kaboomz said:


> in terms of coming up with different uses. i do this for everything as the need arises. it's just improv. to me it's almost laziness, but people comment and say it's quite innovative. like, i fixed my headphones and in the process created a strap for my hoodie using a paper clip. it's so small and silly, but it's just having a problem, and fixing it with whatever you have at hand.
> 
> like...erm...haha i'm looking around my room for a problem :| shit i dunno. i need to be motivated to actually see it. otherwise it's just imaginary like the tree. well ok i'll use the chair as an example! i mean you can use it as a chair, a stool, a hangar, turn it upside down and use it for....see now i need a problem that the chair solves. that's the thing. unless i have some data to fuel Ne, it just runs dry because i don't see the point of entertaining the billions of things i could stick on the legs of a chair. practicality fuels possibility, not vice versa imo
> 
> if you give me data, like, you want the chair to be used IN something, or you have a problem you need SOLVED, then i'm your man...but asking me to look at a chair and describe what i could do with it is like asking someone to go outside annd count raindrops in a storm. i wouldn't know where to start


I see, so such a brainstorming process with more focus requires motivation to the user, triggered by stuff that actually piques their interest or when required by the environment for the user to take action upon that is relevant to them.


----------



## Kaboomz (Jun 14, 2016)

like i said, unless i am focusing on something, the possibilities remain on the periphery of my mind's eye. if they didn't, i would go insane.

look at your keyboard. you're looking at every single word in the human language. it's inconceivable. but you know it's true. your head would explode if you actually tried to type them all. so instead you just see the keyboard...but the words are still there, if you look at them.

no i don't superimpose onto my sensory data. it's in my mind's eye. i see a lamp, my mind's eye sees a lamp, and it's periphery sees electrical grids, storms, out space, inner space, cellular space...it's an infinite loop of nonsense generated by sensory data. trying to do something with this superfluous information is just pointless unless i actually need to

what i find _interesting_ about Ne is that i don't think i'm in control of it. it's more like i'm a conduit for it. the frog jumping seems more like i'm being dragged along these seemingly random trains of thought that ultimately lead me to a solution or an answer. it's like following a constellation in a star storm. i didn't put it there, i just follow it and see the picture when iget to the end.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

VagrantFarce said:


> His stand-up is a whirlwind of open-ended, associative thinking.


I don't see how associative thinking is in itself a part of Ne? Why do you attribute ability to make associations with Ne? By the same token anyone that can come up with random connections is Ne which I don't think is true. 



Empathic said:


> I
> 
> I also think Robin Williams strikes me as ESFJ. ESxJs can have quite an active tertiary Ne, other examples being Letterman/Alex Trebek who are ESTJs, where their profession involves use of Ne a lot, such as in acting that requires spontaneity such as improv and talk show hosting. An ENTP example would be Regis Philbin.
> 
> Also, Nardi is actually quite a textbook INTJ. I've known INTJs who make more expressive use of their Fi, but Nardi is quite pronounced with his use of Te.


I agree as a whole though I think Letterman is an ESFJ also. And well, I am not sold on Nardi being an INTJ because the way he seems to reason doesn't seem reminiscent of Ni. Even INTP makes more sense for him.


----------



## VagrantFarce (Jul 31, 2015)

Entropic said:


> I don't see how associative thinking is in itself a part of Ne? Why do you attribute ability to make associations with Ne? By the same token anyone that can come up with random connections is Ne which I don't think is true.


Well, I see it as characteristic of intuition in general, so yes - anyone can come up with random connections. But not everyone can do it like _that_. 

Coupled with how animated, airy and accessible Williams is when performing...well, it's certainly not Introverted Intuition is it?


----------



## Prada (Sep 10, 2015)

VagrantFarce said:


> Well, I see it as characteristic of intuition in general, so yes - anyone can come up with random connections.


In a sense, this means he can be literally any type because all types have either Ne or Ni. Even SJs have Ne even if weak. I'm not trying to argue with your typing but with the logic that "He shows Ne in his stand-ups which is an occasional activity that can be planned for ahead so he must be a Ne-dom." How much of his time is spent by that? Probably a small amount. It could easily be tertiary or "faked" by other functions (meaning result of combining preparation and mixture of functions).


----------



## VagrantFarce (Jul 31, 2015)

Prada said:


> In a sense, this means he can be literally any type because all types have either Ne or Ni.


Naturally, but only if you take my quote out of context, like you did. 

Either way, I'm not here to argue his type, only that his performance is a great illustration of Ne.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

VagrantFarce said:


> Well, I see it as characteristic of intuition in general, so yes - anyone can come up with random connections. But not everyone can do it like _that_.
> 
> Coupled with how animated, airy and accessible Williams is when performing...well, it's certainly not Introverted Intuition is it?


No, I agree that he is not an Ni type but I don't think he is an Ne dom either and a major contribution to his animation is because of Fe.


----------



## owlet (May 7, 2010)

Ne is about a preference for perceiving opportunities and potential, so it would look like anything you can build from that. There are no specific behaviours to really look out for, as the expression of a focus on potential/opportunities can come across differently depending on things like culture, age etc.


----------



## Empathic (Jul 5, 2016)

Kaboomz said:


> like i said, unless i am focusing on something, the possibilities remain on the periphery of my mind's eye. if they didn't, i would go insane.
> 
> look at your keyboard. you're looking at every single word in the human language. it's inconceivable. but you know it's true. your head would explode if you actually tried to type them all. so instead you just see the keyboard...but the words are still there, if you look at them.
> 
> ...


I understand what you're saying that unless something is in focus (when you are motivated by it or it is relevant to you), the possibilities pertaining to that thing remain on the periphery.

But the process of Ne is still perplexing to me.

With your keyboard example, I can see how there can be a myriad of possibilities in the form of permutation of keys - words in language, numeric combinations, or just any kind of combination of keys, etc. To me, this is kind of like focused brainstorming, like what can be done with a chair - they all relate to the item in question, except now it's a keyboard.

With your lamp example, it's like another associative chain (like how you went from tree to lemon and so on) which expands outward. Here, I can see the logical connections with each jump you made more clearly.

How does the brainstorming process (that centers on something) relate to the associative chain process (that expands outward)? I mean, with the keyboard, you could've gone with an associative chain and then thought of a slab of chocolate or something, right?

With the associative chain, how does it help with leading you to answers to things or help you see a bigger picture? It seems to me like it's randomly darting around with each successive jump without much focus at all.

How does the process of generating possibilities appear like a spider diagram to you? A spider diagram has branches that emanate from a central theme in question. It makes sense in relation to the brainstorming process that focuses on something. But with the associative chain, the leap frogging looks more like a thread that leads to all sorts of places with each jump.


----------



## Empathic (Jul 5, 2016)

owlet said:


> Ne is about a preference for perceiving opportunities and potential, so it would look like anything you can build from that. There are no specific behaviours to really look out for, as the expression of a focus on potential/opportunities can come across differently depending on things like culture, age etc.


Well the generated possibilities by the Ne user can indeed differ depending on the individual. But there are specific Ne things going on, namely focused brainstorming, associative chains, and cross-contextualizing, which are common to Ne users. I'm trying to reconcile these things and trying to see how this all ties into the Ne process as a whole and what it's actually doing. More examples from Ne-doms with descriptions of how Ne manifests for them and explanations as to what they think is going on with the process would help.


----------



## owlet (May 7, 2010)

Empathic said:


> Well the generated possibilities by the Ne user can indeed differ depending on the individual. But there are specific Ne things going on, namely *focused brainstorming, associative chains, and cross-contextualizing*, which are common to Ne users. I'm trying to reconcile these things and trying to see how this all ties into the Ne process as a whole and what it's actually doing. More examples from Ne-doms with descriptions of how Ne manifests for them and explanations as to what they think is going on with the process would help.


The bolded isn't necessarily Ne. Here's something from Jung on Extraverted Intuition:


> He seizes hold of new objects and new ways with eager intensity, sometimes with extraordinary enthusiasm, only to abandon them cold-bloodedly, without regard and apparently without remembrance, as soon as their range becomes clearly defined and a promise of any considerable future development no longer clings to them. As long as a possibility exists, the intuitive is bound to it with thongs of fate. It is as though his whole life went out into the new situation. One gets the impression, which he himself shares, that he has just reached the definitive turning point in his life, and that from now on nothing else can seriously engage his thought and feeling. How- [p. 465] ever reasonable and opportune it may be, and although every conceivable argument speaks in favour of stability, a day will come when nothing will deter him from regarding as a prison, the self-same situation that seemed to promise him freedom and deliverance, and from acting accordingly. Neither reason nor feeling can restrain or discourage him from a new possibility, even though it may run counter to convictions hitherto unquestioned.


(From here.)
So, basically, Ne is preferring to continue to perceive possibilities - so long as the object (external because it's an extroverted function) contains potential, the Ne user will actively perceive it, exploring it until the potential diminishes enough that they feel there's nothing really left to look at and then they move on.
If you're really looking for how the mind of an Ne dominant works, reading that source is a good starting point.


----------



## Kaboomz (Jun 14, 2016)

Empathic said:


> I understand what you're saying that unless something is in focus (when you are motivated by it or it is relevant to you), the possibilities pertaining to that thing remain on the periphery.
> 
> But the process of Ne is still perplexing to me.
> 
> ...


that's why it's intuitive. i don't know. 

i write short fiction, and i write it because i don't know where i'm going with it, i just know it will reveal itself at the end. i mean you use the spider diagram analogy. i'm sure the spider has no idea what his web actually looks like. it's just an instinctual drive that leads him to create it. it knows when to start, what to do, and when it's finished, but how? it's irrelevant. the web does it's job and is only considered a thing of beauty and marvel by creatures like us

i think Ne is like finding a pipe sticking out of the ground and then you dig and you dig and eventually you reveal that there was a ship buried underneath. Ni knows there is a ship there based on other facets of information and works backwards to find out how it got there using the data it gathers from this knowledge. it's logically inductive


----------



## AlphaLeonis (Jun 13, 2014)

Ne doesn't look like something. It just is a state of _being_, just like any dom-fonction out there. Ne-Dom pushes Si down the stack, by wanting to keep an image of self that is free, open to possibilities and not really tied down to any kind of reality. It's... A mindset. Your primary drive. You ego-type. And as an Ne-user who's trying to develop more of the Si perspective, I can tell you, it is difficult to actually ... be _grounded_, inside your head, in anything you set out to do. 

Like, 

"Okay, Theme 1, Step 1. Yay, okay what about step ... ... Wait."
"Step 1 makes me think of this topic 2. And oh... Yes, okay, topic two. This is what you have in topic two. And ... Wait this makes me think of topic 3.
Wait. Wasn't I actually trying to do things in order today? Yes. 
*Consciously goes back to topic 1. Step 1, step 2, step 3, almost done, okay, ... annnd... 
Wait. There was that other topic 2 I was also running on.
Topic 2. Step 1. Step 2. Step 3. Okay, almost done. Getting there. 
Shit, I just remembered, 
I was not done with topic 1. 
And there also was topic 2, and topic 3 and aaaargh godamn. I lost track again. ... Well. Nevermind.

*Looks outward, look for new prompting*
Topic 4." 

And you leave everything there because, well, there were too many things to 'finish' and you don't even want to care anymore, because your Ne is already thinking about what's coming next and really can't imagine how you could find it important to have some _boundaries _and _closure_. So Ne grows more and more anxious, and never really builds anything significant, if not properly tempered with Introverted Judging Functions (to reflect upon the validity on those 'brilliant' ideas it has; because it does not want to be tied down to one idea that could be better than another, and actually have to work with one and increment on it and become an expert at it). I'm not saying this is a general rule, because functions don't work alone in real life, you know; and you can always get better with some training and focus. I simply tried to described a rather imbalanced Ne behaviour, imagine a person running exlusively on Ne; like, how _delusional_, actually, that would be.

Another personal example :
It's like, I wake up in the morning, I try to focus on what I am going to do, and, while I'm trying to figure it out, I actually ended up staying in bed 30 minutes longer because ... Because I truly struggle to put one thing then the other and maintaining a sequential order between things in my day. I just can't seem to spontaneously _ feel the necessity_ to sequence things. I do it in specific situations, like, learning Japanese is the hardest language I've ever started working with; I find it is a great tool to actually put your Si to good use and train it. Because, well, how Kanjis and words are build ... You don't really connect things in a random way. I tried, it is possible, BUT it truly works best if you increment one thing after the other and pay attention to previously memorized kanjis and _bushus_ and build upon what you already know.

To make a final metaphor, Ne's like... "Let's build a cathedral". And if you leave Ne to its own devices (like, without a proper Ti judging to back it up, a Ti fed by incremented knowledge in Si, that is), ... Well.. Ne's like "Okay, I'll just start THERE (the roof). And then, HERE (One wall) and then OVER HERE". Without Ti (or Fi-aux) you just... You just don't imagine how it is that if you don't start by building solid foundations, and to increment upon it, your pretty cathedral won't exist, and it's just going to be a dream. To realize that, you need to have proper Ti/Fi-aux to actually evaluate how solid your ideas are, and that you're not just dreaming or imagining things. It's important to have a good N - S balance, anyways. 

I hope this was useful and informative for anybody who read it through


----------



## Monroe (May 13, 2016)

Kaboomz said:


> tree...lemon...ade...shoes...clogs...poland (sorry denmark), sex (crush in work) construction site, bob the builder, hammer...kids...cannabalism...strawberries...yoghurt...fridge...breakfast...brb


...Okay, the tree=lemon thing makes me think you watched Yolanda Foster on RHOBH at some point ahha. And the clogs to *boot*. I just had to say lol.


----------



## Kaboomz (Jun 14, 2016)

Monroe said:


> ...Okay, the tree=lemon thing makes me think you watched Yolanda Foster on RHOBH at some point ahha. And the clogs to *boot*. I just had to say lol.


RHOBOH, ????, OITNW, GOT, MARGAERY, sex, suicide, cult, robes, sandals, CLOGS POLAND SEX, MARGAERY SEX, POLAND, MARGAERY, SEX, POLAND MARGAERY

IT WAS MARGAERY IN POLAND WITH THE SEX ON RHOBOH...


----------



## AlphaLeonis (Jun 13, 2014)

Oh, and, after I read a few posts (No. I did not _entirely _read. I scanned through. Because Ne. Ne doesn't want to carefully read one thing after the other befor forming conclusions; it jumps to the conclusion and hopes it stands or makes sense. Yep.) 

Okay, after I read over, I noticed how you presented Ne as a spiderweb; this is a good idea. Ne's spider web is made of bouts of Si memories, you know. Si is a Sensing + personal, introverted function; so basically, Ne connects things between themselves using _facts_ it remembers. Ne's way of connecting things is not as _instinctual _as Ni's way of having 'intuitions'. There is a internal database of facts, of bouts of expertise (Si) that feeds it, only Ne doesn't dwell on it and prefers to move on, whereas Si > Ne wants to refine endlessly, build incrementally upon what it knows because it feels safer, it has a solid ground to use as a reference to move forward. Only Si left alone (and this doesn't really happen in real life, again), well... Si would do all the same things all the time, without looking at new perspectives and possibilities to 'grow'. Si needs Ne to grow bigger and bigger, it needs a lower Ne-inspiration (future-driven iNtuitions), whereas Ne needs Si to actually ground itself in reality, because ... Well... Ideas are just ideas, you know. 

They're not *real*, *concrete*, *tangible* (to a strong Ne-user, this may be difficult to realize, as we get so caught up with what we imagine is, rather than what truly is happening). So like, ...Imagine making decisions (Judging functions) upon ideas coming from your imagination entirely ? That's not possible, you can't produce anything out of thin air, you need content to propel you (Si facts, and details and prior experience and knowledge). Ne is just naturally oblivious to what Si does to nourish one's psyche, and ... Well. It's like, "Okay, I believe this is a good idea. Oh, and this. And this. And this. And this." You could go endlessly, exploring, but you'd never actually create or judge the value of those ideas.

Ideas are are just 'potential waiting to be realized' (through... Eh, TI/Fi + Si). 

We don't exactly ... _randomly_think of things. The connections we make are based in our memories (which is personal, but you can't see it, since it's internal, and personal, like all introverted functions). 

Say, again, back to my Kanjis.
If I go the Ne-way (I naturally see kto do this), I need to look at everything. _Randomly_. I have a book through which I need to flip over, and over, and over until I find connections. "Oh. Look at Kanji 1. Okay, I think I remember seeing it somewhere else, like, around here, with Kanji 2" Sooo, Kanji 1 + Kanji 2 mean something mmmh. 
But wait, Kanji 2 is also used with Kanji 3 and Kanji 4. 
Wait, I think Kanji 4 was also used on the page with Kanji 1 (Si previous facts). 
Yep. So now,
I will remember how Kanji 4 is the common point between Kanji 1 and 2. 

[Kanji 1 - Kanji 4 - Kanji 2] Would be a small structure/pattern here. 
But from Kanji 4, I would be look at other opportunities to connect it with other Kanjis. And those new found Kanjis perhaps wil llead me back to Kanji 1 and 2, and help me form a temporary closed system.

If I were to use the Si method, I think I would go one by one, following some sort of external Judging (Fe or Te). The book I'm using is quite uncomfortable because it uses an incremental knowledge of mnemonics. So you learn a set of mnemonics, then you build upon that. It requires focus, attention to details, and a willingness to finish things that I struggle to establish; it requires a lot of repetition, and going over before you move on. 

It's a true challenge for me. I have to switch between the two approaches when learning Kanjis. But well. Hope this example provided some insights too.


----------



## Empathic (Jul 5, 2016)

owlet said:


> Here's something from Jung on Extraverted Intuition:
> 
> [excerpt]


If you've read the opening post, I mentioned that I'm aware of descriptions by Jung, which is what you've just quoted. Though I appreciate the time you took to extract it and provide a link.



owlet said:


> The bolded isn't necessarily Ne.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yes, it is. You should check out other MBTI literature, such as the works of Nardi, Thomson, etc. I'm here for more specific examples of Ne in action by Ne-doms, as I still find Ne slightly elusive to me.


----------



## Empathic (Jul 5, 2016)

Kaboomz said:


> i think Ne is like finding a pipe sticking out of the ground and then you dig and you dig and eventually you reveal that there was a ship buried underneath.


With your lamp example (lamp -> electrical grids -> storms -> outer space -> inner space -> cellular space), were you actually trying to seek for something in particular? Otherwise, it seems to me like random, associative jumps - you started with lamp and ended with a biological cell.



Kaboomz said:


> RHOBOH, ????, OITNW [...]
> 
> 
> 
> ...


So, is there actually a basis to your previous tree example, based on what you watched on television? And can you translate this post of yours, which seems like another associative chain related to your tree example.


----------



## Empathic (Jul 5, 2016)

AlphaLeonis said:


> Ne-Dom pushes Si down the stack, by wanting to keep an image of self that is free, open to possibilities and not really tied down to any kind of reality.
> 
> [...]
> 
> ...


Yes, I'm aware that outwardly Ne-doms can find it a bit difficult to focus on things, as Ne keeps generating possibilities, and can get sidetracked easily.



AlphaLeonis said:


> I noticed how you presented Ne as a spiderweb; this is a good idea. Ne's spider web is made of bouts of Si memories, you know. Si is a Sensing + personal, introverted function; so basically, Ne connects things between themselves using _facts_ it remembers. Ne's way of connecting things is not as _instinctual _as Ni's way of having 'intuitions'. There is a internal database of facts, of bouts of expertise (Si) that feeds it, only Ne doesn't dwell on it and prefers to move on
> 
> [...]
> 
> We don't exactly ... _randomly_think of things. The connections we make are based in our memories (which is personal, but you can't see it, since it's internal, and personal, like all introverted functions).


Can you describe how Ne's connections are made by bouts of Si memories? Could you provide an example of an association chain, and describe the connections for the jumps. For instance, you could look outside at a tree. (Or if you're not near one or you need inspiration, you can take a look at the first tree image on Wikipedia for the "Tree" entry.) What goes through your mind?


----------



## owlet (May 7, 2010)

Empathic said:


> If you've read the opening post, I mentioned that I'm aware of descriptions by Jung, which is what you've just quoted. Though I appreciate the time you took to extract it and provide a link.
> 
> Yes, it is. You should check out other MBTI literature, such as the works of Nardi, Thomson, etc. I'm here for more specific examples of Ne in action by Ne-doms, as I still find Ne slightly elusive to me.


Well, Jung's description isn't about brainstorming or associative thinking, so that's removing that from the equation and leaving just 'MBTI'. I find that's often very behaviour-focused which, as I said, isn't a consistently accurate method of typing due to influences of nurture on expression. But that's off-topic so I won't go down that route.
On that note, can you explain why associative thinking, brainstorming etc. is purely Ne?


----------



## PaladinX (Feb 20, 2013)

Empathic said:


> Yes, it is. You should check out other MBTI literature, such as the works of Nardi, Thomson, etc. I'm here for more specific examples of Ne in action by Ne-doms, as I still find Ne slightly elusive to me.


Not necessarily. At least not according to MBTI type theory itself.

*Extraverted Intuition*

Sees possibilities in the external world. Trusts flashes from the unconscious, which can then be shared with others. (myersbriggs.org)
Scan the environment for new and stimulating ideas and enthusiastically pursue them with others; search for the most creative and interesting idea. (MBTI practitioner's training manual)

From Gifts Differing by Isabel Myers:


*Extraverted Intuition**Introverted Intuition*

Uses the inner understanding in the interests of the objective situation.


Uses the objective situation in the interests of the inner understanding.


Regards the immediate situation as a prison from which escape is urgently necessary and aims to escape by means of some sweeping change in the objective situation.


Regards the immediate situation as a prison from which escape is urgently necessary and aims to escape through some sweeping change in the subjective understanding of the objective situation.


Is wholly directed upon outer objects, searching for emerging possibilities, and will sacrifice all else for such possibilities when found.


Receives its impetus from outer objects but is never arrested by external possibilities, being occupied rather by searching out new angles for viewing and understanding life.


May be artistic, scientific, mechanical, inventive, industrial, commercial, social, political, or adventurous.


May be creative in any field: artistic, literary, scientific, inventive, philosophical, or religious.


Finds self-expression natural and easy.


Finds self-expression difficult.


Finds its greatest value in the promotion and initiation of new enterprises.


Finds it greatest value lies in the interpretation of life and then promotion of understanding.


Requires the development of balancing judgment not only for the criticism and evaluation of the intuitive enthusiasms but also to hold it to the completion of its various activities.


Requires the development of balancing judgment not only for the criticism and evaluation of intuitive understanding but to enable it to impart its visions to others and bring them to practical usefulness in the world.


----------



## PaladinX (Feb 20, 2013)

Personally, I don't identify with the idea of Ne commonly presented on online forums.

Here is my take from a previous post:

I think what is interesting is the possibility itself, not in realizing or actualizing it. When I say I see endless possibilities it's more like I'm in a room with multiple doors. I don't know what is behind them, but I'm excited that there are so many to choose from. Even opening them is not as exciting as the potential behind the door. When I've opened most of them, I'll start to lose interest. When I've opened them all and they don't lead anywhere else I get bored. In any case, the point is that I see lots of doors, not necessarily what is on the other side of them.

I don't care if the possibilities are about a tangible real life thing or a theoretical problem. The possibilities, however, usually arise from real life situations and not from something I'm thinking about. For example, a friend of mine showed me an article about the top ten things that science could not explain. One of which was that scientists could not explain how gravity works. I went on a two week binge absorbing everything I could about gravity and exploring different possibilities for explaining it.

Another example is from Richard Feynman, arguably the quintessential ENTP. One day him and a colleague were making spaghetti. The colleague asked him "why does spaghetti break into 3 or more pieces? why can't you break it in half?" They then spent the next couple of hours creating all kinds of experiments to test out various theories. Just for funzies.

To sum up, the most interesting things to me are the things that yield the greatest possibilities (potential).

I like this description of Ne from Jung:




> Just as extraverted sensation strives to reach the highest pitch of actuality, because only thus can the appearance of a complete life be created, *so intuition tries to encompass the greatest possibilities, since only through the awareness of possibilities is intuition fully satisfied. Intuition seeks to discover possibilities in the objective situation*; hence as a mere tributary function (viz. when not in the position of priority) it is also the instrument which, in the presence of a hopelessly blocked situation, works automatically towards the issue, which no other function could discover. *Where intuition has the priority, every ordinary situation in life seems like a closed room, which intuition has to open. It is constantly seeking outlets and fresh possibilities in external life*. In a very short time every actual situation becomes a prison to the intuitive; it burdens him like a chain, prompting a compelling need for solution. *At times objects would seem to have an almost exaggerated value, should they chance to represent the idea of a severance or release that might lead to the discovery of a new possibility*. Yet no sooner have they performed their office, serving intuition as a ladder or a bridge, than they appear to have no further value, and are discarded as mere burdensome appendages. *A fact is acknowledged only in so far as it opens up fresh possibilities of advancing beyond it and of releasing the individual from its operation. Emerging possibilities are compelling motives from which intuition cannot escape and to which all else must be sacrificed.*


----------



## tanstaafl28 (Sep 10, 2012)

Empathic said:


> I'm trying to get a clearer picture of Ne, and would like to see it in action for Ne-doms. I'm looking for specific examples.
> 
> I'm aware that Ne can be described as exploring possibilities, brainstorming, cross-contextualizing and so on. I'm also aware of Ne descriptions by Jung and those by Nardi, Thomson, etc., and metaphors describing Ne like a supernova. But I still find Ne to be slightly elusive.
> 
> Can you describe what it's like to use Ne when you go through your environment, and provide a short account of that? For example, when you look at a tree outside, what goes through your mind?


There is no clear picture of Ne, it's blurry, messy, and all over the place. It is a web of words and thoughts and pictures all jumbled together. It is a machine gun spitting out ideas, some good, some not, all at once. It isn't fully conscious, it bubbles up from the subconscious. It is out of control, big-picture, approximate, and unpredictable. 

It feels like lot of clever guesswork that just seems to appear out of nowhere, just when I need it, as if there's some sort of luck involved. My mom always used to say to me: "You could walk through shit and come out smelling like roses." It is like that. When I'm pushed into a corner, I always seem to find a way out. I'm always looking out for the "win-win" scenario, but if someone has to lose, I'm going to bet on me to win, especially when things look at their worst.


----------



## tanstaafl28 (Sep 10, 2012)

I forgot one more thing: trying new things. I always seem to have a pretty good edge when trying new things. I may not be the best right away, but I usually pick things up faster than most other people I know.


----------



## AlphaLeonis (Jun 13, 2014)

@Empathic

If I go outside, to my garden, and look at a tree, I will start by remembering something specific I was told about that tree, or something that happened to me with that specific tree at some point in my life, and this will serve as a prompt for a topic, which topic will serve as a second prompt, then a third one (You got that part).

The entre Tree on Wikipedia, and the first few lines :

In botany, a tree is a perennial plant with an elongated stem, or trunk, supporting branches and leaves in most species. In some usages, the definition of a tree may be narrower, including only woody plants with secondary growth, plants that are usable as lumber or plants above a specified height. 

If I read the text and look for prompts in the words themselves (which is a specific focus I take here), here's what you get.

- Botany : The word is linked to "Botanical garden" to the my friend's teacher who served as a guide through the said Botanical Garden. I don't remember all the details (I only dwell in rather negative experiences when I do so, and I feel like this is due to Si being annoying). I simply remember some sort of 'points' (A vague image of the teacher + a vague idea that I have a memory in a botanical garden). 

- trunk : Makes me think of Dragon Ball Z. I think if I remember correctly, there's a character whose name is similar (But I am unsure of that, because my Si's lower). 

- species : Darwin's theory. 

- woody : Woody Allen (Woody Allen's movies. Oh by the way, I liked Cristina Barcelona, 'cause there's ScarJo in it. I like ScarJo. Hopefully, I would be having a discussion with someone, which hopefully will have the person talking about something related, then I'll probably end up using what they said as a prompt for something totally unrelated to them, because inwards, what they say makes me think of other personal things.)


----------



## leictreon (Jan 4, 2016)

I'm a Ne aux, but... Ne kinda looks like this.


----------



## Empathic (Jul 5, 2016)

owlet said:


> Well, Jung's description isn't about brainstorming or associative thinking, so that's removing that from the equation and leaving just 'MBTI'.
> 
> On that note, can you explain why associative thinking, brainstorming etc. is purely Ne?





PaladinX said:


> Not necessarily. At least not according to MBTI type theory itself.


I didn't expect so much quibbling over some fairly basic key terms in relation to descriptions of Ne that I've used in the opening post. These terms are quite well-established in typology, if you've taken a look at the more recent works by typologists. The terms are relatable to and used by numerous Ne-users themselves.

Here's a brief description from one of the works of Berens and Nardi, with similar Ne key terms bolded:



> Extraverted iNtuiting involves noticing hidden meanings and interpreting them, often entertaining a wealth of possible interpretations from just one idea or interpreting what someone's behavior really means.
> 
> It also involves seeing things "as if," with various possible representations of reality.
> 
> ...


Other works including those by the same typologists elaborate on how Ne makes associations and connections when it is exploring possibilities.



owlet said:


> 'MBTI'. I find that's often very behaviour-focused which, as I said, isn't a consistently accurate method of typing due to influences of nurture on expression.


There is nothing overly "behavior-focused" about MBTI. Jung's Psychological Types itself contains a handful of behavioral examples interspersed in the text when describing the cognitive functions, of which MBTI is an extension. For that matter, the study of psychology is fundamentally concerned with both the mind and behavior. Just because behavior is described does not mean it is tainted by individuality and influences of nurture. There are common behaviors exhibited when users exercise each cognitive function. Moreover, the key terms are actually describing in more detail what goes on with Ne as a cognitive process.



PaladinX said:


> [MBTI manual excerpt]
> [Myers excerpt]


For MBTI, those are just bare bones descriptions that you've narrowed to the manual and the work by Myers. MBTI type theory has since been significantly expanded upon by other typologists.

Jung's Psychological Types was indeed revolutionary regarding type theory in psychology. That work laid out the foundations of the type theory he developed, though his style of writing wasn't exactly accessible, even by 20th century standards. Myers and Briggs followed Jung's work and tried to make it more accessible and practicable by developing MBTI, while also expanding upon type theory.

Since then, typology has evolved a lot, and the works of those of Berens, Nardi, Thomson, etc. have significantly expanded upon type theory, which substantially flesh out the cognitive functions with detailed descriptions and examples of each of the functions in action by users. Nardi has even gone on to link type theory with neuroscience in recent years, showing how certain regions of the brain are active when the cognitive functions are used.

I started this thread for specific examples of Ne by Ne-users. I mentioned in the thread that I'm aware of various descriptions by Jung and other typologists. You don't need to continue to rehash descriptions by Jung or Myers, bloating up this thread. This is not another generic "what is Ne" thread. If you two wish to dispute the veracity of the findings of the other typologists, do so - on another thread.


----------



## Empathic (Jul 5, 2016)

Here are some interesting (and fun) examples I've found on Ne threads posted by Ne-users that also show clear links between jumps:



Kito said:


> Look over there. What's that? Is that a tree? It looks like a giant piece of broccoli. I wonder what someone who's never eaten broccoli before would say if you gave them some? Would they think they're eating miniature trees? Now there's a pigeon in the tree. Why do pigeons bob their heads while they're walking? Are they doing some sort of avian salute or something? BACK AND FORTH, MY PIGEON COMRADES, BACK AND FORTH! Ha, that'd be terrifying, seeing an entire army of pigeons walking towards you. Of course, we'd just crush them, they're probably kamikaze pigeons. Who came up with the word kamikaze anyway? Did some suicidal Chinese samurai shout "KAAAA MEEEE KAAAA ZEEEE" while attacking, but end up killing himself? I'm worried about what the people around him thought. "Hey, this guy's just died and we should be mourning, but let's take this moment to name that kind of move after his last words!" Oh the horrors of humanity... perhaps the world would be a better place if all humans exploded in a mass of gigantic fireworks. Not that there'd be anybody left to admire it, however. The poor animals would run away terrified. It'd be the beginning of the animal age... holy shit, the possibilities! Wait, where'd the phrase 'holy shit' come from? If you read it literally it really isn't that charming. "Holy shit!" "WHERE?!" That reminds me of a picture of German soldiers shooting down Nyan Cat, which they named DIE NYANKATZE.
> 
> ^ That's Ne.





Ginnaynay said:


> Wow this theater has a nice little intro, why didn't the old theater have one this cool? --> this one has more money, so it can hire better animators, designers, ect. ----> speaking of design, I have a project in design class due soon ---> oh yeah, my dad wanted me to design his shirt for his shop ---> he was going to email what he has so far ---> I never checked my email ---> Oh yeah, I need to check my email!





pianodog said:


> If I see a cup, I'll probably cup up with some alternate means of a cup, of It'll remind me of something like the holy grail etc... It might make me think of a weird other world where they are using magic bubble containers in which you stick your tongue in to drink rather than a cup.


----------

