# Ni-shadow for Ne-dom



## Aha (Mar 6, 2014)

Hallo guys! I am an ENTP and I score *maximum Ne* points on every questionnaire and test (cogs, socionics, etc). That's true and that is how I live and see the Universe 

I want to ask other * Ne-dom * people and those who do know Ne-dom guys:
What is Ni for you? Did you experience it? How often? In what situations? Can you give an example?

I was musing over questionnaire I found on the forum (Ni section of it):



> 1.) I get insights that seem to come out of thin air and I have learned to rely on them


1.) I constantly get insights. The problem is that I would rather trust my Ti over this insight. The funny thing is that the the insight is right in most of such situations whilst Ti is wrong.


> 2.) I get insights into intrinsic patterns and connections that may not seem linked to the external world.


2) I would say I see patterns and connections between everything with everything in 4 dimensions. They are connected in the first place, and disconnected only if my Ti says like 10 times that it is not logical. 


> 3.) I reflect on ideas and inner patterns from many perspectives.


3) It is true, but it could be also Ne-Ti process easily 


> 4.) I am aware that if I am patient, whatever I am perceiving will become crystal clear and I rely on that one perception as being the data I should trust


4) If I muse over something very long and let it go for a time it will pop up in my head in a few days with a solution that is clearly true


> 5.) I see things as the ultimately can be.


5) Everything is possible. It is a Ne-thing too.


> 6.) I am energized by and make meaningful connections using visions, images, and symbols


6) Absolutely


> 7.) I interpret the intent behind situations, communications, or happenings.


7) I interpret and understand it subconsciously, but I am still stubbornly (most of the time) refusing to trust it (especially in the negative situations) over Ti or Fe or even Ne. I am an eternal optimist and try to see or envision positive in everything.

So where is the boundary between Ne and Ni for Ne (or Ni) dom people?

You sometimes feel like a Jedi till your Ti tells you that the insight was quite logical actually and you were possibly able to come to the same conclusion at a time by logic.

p.s. my mom is ENFP and father is INTJ


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

That's a bad desription of Ni. Too general. Ni is about personal symbolism. To get a better idea of how Ni is like even for those with Ni shadow, it's seeing an image like this:









And associate to what you are meant to associate it to symbolically, which is peace. You encounter these kinds of Ni symbols everyday like the green guy light when crossing a street, or the male and female icons when choosing which public restroom to use. 

That's what Ni does at a very simplistic, basic and fundamental level. Most people are able to recognize these symbols.


----------



## Aha (Mar 6, 2014)

ephemereality said:


> That's a bad desription of Ni. Too general. Ni is about personal symbolism. To get a better idea of how Ni is like even for those with Ni shadow, it's seeing an image like this:
> 
> View attachment 95678
> 
> And associate to what you are meant to associate it to symbolically, which is peace.


Words are misleading. Even knowing that sign and If I ignore the words I would think that bird is 1) high and free; 2) flying to build a nest; 3) independent; having a strong character
If I were to judge by the words I would say it is some kind of commemorating sign 



ephemereality said:


> You encounter these kinds of Ni symbols everyday like the green guy light when crossing a street, or the male and female icons when choosing which public restroom to use.
> 
> That's what Ni does at a very simplistic, basic and fundamental level. Most people are able to recognize these symbols.


Even though I, most often, find them amusing and funny (and I do envision a way to change the sign or color to be more precise for people to understand /// and more amusing) - they are recognizable of course.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Aha said:


> Words are misleading. If I ignore the words I would think that bird is 1) high and free; 2) flying to build a nest; 3) independent; having a strong character
> If I were to judge by the words I would say it is some kind of commemorating sign


Not an ideal picture no, but I was just looking for an example in a hurry. 



> Even though I, most often, find them amusing and funny (and I do envision a way to change the sign to be more precise to understand for people /// and more amusing) - they are recognizable of course.


Yes, but you probably don't pay attention to why, which is why it's a shadow element. I'm very attuned to symbols around me.


----------



## Aha (Mar 6, 2014)

ephemereality said:


> Yes, but you probably don't pay attention to why, which is why it's a shadow element. I'm very attuned to symbols around me.


Yes, the first reaction is to envision a change - a probable improvement


----------



## Aha (Mar 6, 2014)

I will give you an example

As a kid, my best hobbie was astrophysics and sci-fi and I intuitively came to conclusion (understood, knowing how stars, planets, molecules, atoms are moving) to Bohr model, some relativity postulates and basics of entropy. I did read about all those much later when I was studying it in high school and university... 

p.s. the funniest shit I encountered whilst studying in University was the philosophy lectures - almost everything they taught there I came to by myself previously, especially Socrates thoughts


----------



## tangosthenes (Oct 29, 2011)

Aha said:


> I will give you an example
> 
> As a kid, my best hobbie was astrophysics and sci-fi and I intuitively came to conclusion (understood, knowing how stars, planets, molecules, atoms are moving) to Bohr model, some relativity postulates and basics of entropy. I did read about all those much later when I was studying it in high school and university...
> 
> p.s. the funniest shit I encountered whilst studying in University was the philosophy lectures - almost everything they taught there I came to by myself previously, especially Socrates thoughts


Yeah, I've had this happen many times. Shitty thing about it is that it isn't purposeful to the extent I'd need it to be to write/do something useful since people don't get things very quickly. That's consistent logic, it's easy for some of us when we "muse". You sure you aren't just exposing a certain width of hole with logic and using Ne to fill it up?


----------



## Aha (Mar 6, 2014)

tangosthenes said:


> Yeah, I've had this happen many times. Shitty thing about it is that it isn't purposeful to the extent I'd need it to be to write/do something useful since people don't get things very quickly. That's consistent logic, it's easy for some of us when we "muse". You sure you aren't just exposing a certain width of hole with logic and using Ne to fill it up?


Yes, you are happy that you came there by yourself, but other people either skeptical or not even impressed. And it is absolutely useless since it was already discovered by guys just like you but hundred years before.

Yeah, I too think that Ne-Ti-Ne loop can imitate Ni pretty well. But there is a difference between the excitement of branching off new ideas and the sudden realization (so called "Aha" insight). When the realization clicks, you feel like you are 100% sure about that. Until Ti deconstructs the sh*t out of it, at least.
Though, I must confess that I fancy the idea of using both Ne and Ni. 
I did read that they (shadow functions) can be developed in the same way as our conscious functions, but used only either on demand or under stress (or even randomly). The problem is - there is no theory that was unequivocally proved or disproved. 


p.s. btw, Bohr is an INTJ


----------



## Psychopomp (Oct 3, 2012)

tangosthenes said:


> Yeah, I've had this happen many times. Shitty thing about it is that it isn't purposeful to the extent I'd need it to be to write/do something useful since people don't get things very quickly. That's consistent logic, it's easy for some of us when we "muse". You sure you aren't just exposing a certain width of hole with logic and using Ne to fill it up?


When this happened to me, my first thought was this. I didn't really entertain for a second any notion that it made me special. I am sure half the people going through these classes think the same thing. 

The thing is, we don't have any concept of how much our culture, our upbringing, everything that we are and that we know is built on top of these precepts iterated endlessly over the milennia. That is what leaves us sitting in a class thinking that we, too, invented the same revolutionary thoughts as X philosopher or scientist.

Bullshit. We reconstituted it in our brains from seeing all the minute and subtle ways that knowledge has made itself evident in our culture, in media, in everything. Passing phrases on a television show, morals at the end of a book, even the devices we use SHOW the residue of those discoveries. We are simply assimilating all that.

You don't see members of isolated jungle villages coming up with this stuff. Do they just not have any ENTPs? Silliness. We are soaked head to toe in the words and thoughts of great men+women and don't see it. 

THAT is what my Ne did for me. It turned my own perception on it's head and it wouldn't stop until the rug was pulled out. It defied the stagnation of my self-aggrandizement. It inducted conceptually. 

Also, @_ephemereality_ - the symbol was perfect. It was common and simple and reflected the point in the most essential way. One of the most unambiguous and pervasive symbols you could have chosen. It's interesting how much birds lend themselves to symbolism. Vulture, Eagle, Dove, Peacock, Albatross, Raven, and Canary. I wonder if it is their natural separation from us, their fleeting (ephemeral!) nature, their association with the sky and all that it represents to us. There is something mystical-izing about creatures who we see in such specific ways, with such stark demeanors, yet are never able to know well. 

Also, birds are the worst. Feathery snakes whose eyes possess nothing but cold murder, that are also surprisingly filthy.


----------



## pretense (Jan 2, 2013)

Aha said:


> I will give you an example
> 
> As a kid, my best hobbie was astrophysics and sci-fi and I intuitively came to conclusion (understood, knowing how stars, planets, molecules, atoms are moving) to Bohr model, some relativity postulates and basics of entropy. I did read about all those much later when I was studying it in high school and university...
> 
> p.s. the funniest shit I encountered whilst studying in University was the philosophy lectures - almost everything they taught there I came to by myself previously, especially Socrates thoughts


Haha, that's funny. 

I can't say I've come up with anything that fantastic on my own, but to a degree I can relate to this. Especially philosophical ideas. 

It really pisses me off. The worst one is that Neil Degrasse Tyson youtube video, "the most astounding fact," which has about a gazillion views, mostly because my idea is even better than his. He says that the core elements that make up your body once belonged to stars or something like that. My idea was that everything that I am made of dates back to at least the big bang. I also came up with that idea before him. My ESFJ sister told me it was stupid, and at the time I was very young and believed her. DAMNIT. The majority of others aren't as annoying as they were already claimed before I thought of them, it's actually more of a confidence boost than anything.

I shouldn't say it's "my idea," though. All ideas are shared in one way or another.


----------



## Aha (Mar 6, 2014)

consciousness said:


> Haha, that's funny.
> 
> I can't say I've come up with anything that fantastic on my own, but to a degree I can relate to this. Especially philosophical ideas.
> 
> ...


Reminded me of this ironical "motivator"


----------



## pretense (Jan 2, 2013)

Aha said:


> Reminded me of this ironical "motivator"



yeah, that last line blows mine out of the water.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

consciousness said:


> yeah, that last line blows mine out of the water.


How so? 

I hate to ask because it flabbergasts me, but why is this picture so amazing? I can see so many ways to conceptualize this. I am not even sure I agree with the premise of the picture that is, our eyes expand our consciousness. It questions what consciousness is in the first place to me. Why would my sight or ability to see expand consciousness by itself? Is being aware of physical stimulus the same as expanded consciousness? By itself, it seems like a very Pe/extrovert-thing to say, seeking identity in the external environment.


----------



## Aha (Mar 6, 2014)

ephemereality said:


> How so?
> 
> I hate to ask because it flabbergasts me, but why is this picture so amazing? I can see so many ways to conceptualize this. I am not even sure I agree with the premise of the picture that is, *our eyes expand our consciousness*. It questions what consciousness is in the first place to me. *Why would my sight or ability to see expand consciousness by itself?* Is being aware of physical stimulus the same as expanded consciousness? By itself, it seems like a very Pe/extrovert-thing to say, seeking identity in the external environment.


I think it is more like a metaphor in this case. 
Not the focal point of the idea, at least - they wouldn't describe your inner processing of the perceived information into a given consciousness in the small motivation picture about how we are the Universe


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Aha said:


> I think it is more like a metaphor in this case.
> Not the focal point of the idea, at least - they wouldn't describe your inner processing of the perceived information into a given consciousness in the small motivation picture about how we are the Universe


You mean like absorbing information externally to make up a part of your own experience? Then if so I have to say that's very Si thing to say so yeah.


----------



## Aha (Mar 6, 2014)

ephemereality said:


> You mean like absorbing information externally to make up a part of your own experience? Then if so I have to say that's very Si thing to say so yeah.


Hm, as you mentioned it - yeah, absorbing everything for the deconstruction and reconstruction


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Aha said:


> Hm, as you mentioned it - yeah, absorbing everything for the deconstruction and reconstruction


Yes, I don't reason like that. I can't describe how I reason about consciousness, but I see it as something more of an innate thing. I don't see experience itself being linked to consciousness, though I can be conscious of experience, obviously.


----------



## Aha (Mar 6, 2014)

ephemereality said:


> Yes, I don't reason like that. I can't describe how I reason about consciousness, but I see it as something more of an innate thing. I don't see experience itself being linked to consciousness, though I can be conscious of experience, obviously.


That is why I joy being on this forum - everyone sees the world differently - so you can experience, even if second-hand, what it is like in the eyes of others. Trying to emulate, or at least imagine, the processes to understand more


----------



## Psychopomp (Oct 3, 2012)

ephemereality said:


> How so?
> 
> I hate to ask because it flabbergasts me, but why is this picture so amazing? I can see so many ways to conceptualize this. I am not even sure I agree with the premise of the picture that is, our eyes expand our consciousness. It questions what consciousness is in the first place to me. Why would my sight or ability to see expand consciousness by itself? Is being aware of physical stimulus the same as expanded consciousness? By itself, it seems like a very Pe/extrovert-thing to say, seeking identity in the external environment.


I think it has got to be mostly Fe. Those sorts of things are what every STP posts on my facebook all day long. I erroneously associated all that with Se, and you corrected me that it was Fe. I still think you are right.

That poster hit my Fe a little, but then .. with the 'your eyes are stardust and thus the universe viewing itself'. Sure, but it is Fe that tries to make that meaningful. 

This isn't an Ne thing. Any Ne dom is going to wince at this because the very poster they are seeing is what falls apart in the mind. I'd expect any Ne to go 'meta' on something like this, and be more interested in the nature of the poster and those who made it then to get caught up in something that feels forced in the message itself. That is just what I would personally anticipate from an Ne. I think I would be fairly accurate in that anticipation... but you never know, individuals don't always follow group patterns for one reason or another. 

As for me, stuff like that does not 'blow my mind'. It's overblown. It isn't real. It hopes we won't think about it too much. That we want our mind blown by what is ultimately a gimmick. 

In the meantime, I have some ISTP friends who I want to forward it to.. they will lose their shit over something like that. Good on them. Hrm. Maybe there is a 'Beta' association with stuff like this now that I think about it? I could see NFJs resonating with something like this?


----------



## Aha (Mar 6, 2014)

arkigos said:


> That poster hit my Fe a little, but then .. with the 'your eyes are stardust and thus the universe viewing itself'. Sure, but it is Fe that tries to make that meaningful.


Nice to know

The whole picture was about to carry the line "You are the Universe experiencing yourself" to people who don't muse over such things. Don't burn your Ti over it too much.

Ne-doms are different: I know a few Ne-Fi who do not care about neither Universe nor biology.
Though, I am sure that for the majority of Ne-Ti this is a child's thoughts.


----------

