# Is this Ni or Ne in action?



## pianodog (Jan 25, 2013)

So I'm sure that I'm an ESFP because I definitely have Te and Se is my dominant so I have to have Fi and Ni but the description of Ne sounds more correct than Ni to me.

What I do is often get lots of ideas from a single context like this 

I was talking about how stupid it is that those chinese made christmas lights dont have a positive and negative female end so drop cords wont fit without modifying the cord. Then I thought about how the cords have a piece of plastic blocking you from using a drop cord with a ground on it. Then I thought about how europe has no ground on their household sockets, then I thought about how nice it would be to have some double male connecter piece to allow you to connect 2 female ends together on the lights . Then I thought about how cool it would be to run a drop cord over the garage door so he car wouldnt run over it nor would you have to go outside to unplug the lights. Then I thought about making the cord usage more effiecient by plugging in some kind of central connector in the middle of the yard - And all that came to my mind in about 30 secs. 

So thats how my intiition works, I often think of great ways to solve problems but they usually require things that I dont have nor may not even exist. Sometimes they aren't even practical. 


Is this Ni or Ne?


----------



## Rushing Wind (Jun 22, 2009)

Primarily, this sounds like Ne to me. I would say Ni because it all seems related, however, to me it sounds like similar ideas, but not ideas relating to your current situation. I use Ne all the time and it seems coherent to me.


----------



## pianodog (Jan 25, 2013)

Could I have a strong Ne instead of Ni and still be ESFP?


----------



## Dragheart Luard (May 13, 2013)

pianodog said:


> Could I have a strong Ne instead of Ni and still be ESFP?


Nope, if you're sure of being ESFP, then anything intuitive that you notice would be the work of inferior Ni. Ne works together with Si. There could be some confusions because Ne and Se are both extroverted perceiving functions, so what you think is Ne it's probably Ni being filtered through your Se. Se-doms don't value Ne, specially as it's the shadow function of Ni.


----------



## SharpestNiFe (Dec 16, 2012)

It started off sounding like Te-Ni, but then ended up sounding like Ne to me.


----------



## Sporadic Aura (Sep 13, 2009)

This is definitely not Ne, it is for sure Se/Ni. Everything in this string of thought starts with 'how things are' and then is 'how to make things cooler or more efficient'. Ne starts more from 'why are things like this' or 'this thing is related to _seemingly unrelated thing_ because of ...', it pulls from Si and examples from the past to fuel it.

I think it's very likely you are an ESFP. ESFP's aren't bad at intuition they just prefer to use it less often. It's about preference more than your ability to use it.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Sporadic Aura said:


> ESFP's aren't bad at intuition they just prefer to use it less often. It's about preference more than your ability to use it.


Actually, they are bad at intuition in general. That's why they are sensors. Inferior intuition is no less primitive than any other inferior. The more egoic grasp we have of a specific function, the better its use, because it will possess greater flexibility. The inferior is more black and white.


----------



## Sporadic Aura (Sep 13, 2009)

ephemereality said:


> Actually, they are bad at intuition in general. That's why they are sensors. Inferior intuition is no less primitive than any other inferior. The more egoic grasp we have of a specific function, the better its use, because it will possess greater flexibility. The inferior is more black and white.


Alright then you are 'bad' at sensing and absolutely inept at anything relating with the physical world. But, of course you and all other INTJ's aren't, to say they are is ridiculous. Without your inferior function it is impossible to fully use your primary function, as they work together in a tandem. INFP's are not 'bad' at thinking, INTP's are not 'bad' at feeling and ESFP's are not 'bad' at intuition. It is a preference.


----------



## Psychopomp (Oct 3, 2012)

pianodog said:


> So I'm sure that I'm an ESFP because I definitely have Te and Se is my dominant so I have to have Fi and Ni but the description of Ne sounds more correct than Ni to me.
> 
> What I do is often get lots of ideas from a single context like this
> 
> ...


Yeah, Se/Ni and some 'T'. 

Ne is more about disassociation of the conceptual aspect of something. What they mean, or what they represent.

An ENFP might see Christmas lights, and think about whether or not 'Christmas', the idea of Christmas, the concept of it, were good or bad in an archetypical sense. Lights represent a conceptual ideal.

The lights are a reflection of a certain spirit, and if it is good, we must put them up that no soul misses them. If it is bad, then we should tear them down from every house, by God. 

What that is will come into the mind of an ENFP from a variety of agnostic angles, and they will rely on their Fi/Si to answer it. The precedence of nostalgia, and private feeling. 

Yet the ENFP will always spin a bit on what it all 'means', always credulistically supposing what that might be - on a high-level / theoretical / conceptual / etc scope. I should know, because I am recounting all this from the conversation I have with my ENFP wife every damned year. 

What you thought about was entirely physical. Stuff you can picture in the mind or hold in the hand. S, and T. S that inducts a multitude of possibilities for physical variance is Se... and you were clearly working in the realm of logic. So, Se/Te (or Ti) would be the best explanation of your example.


----------



## randomshoes (Dec 11, 2013)

That looks like a classic example of Se and Te having a conversation. I can relate to the Te (it would be more efficient if...) but I tend to say that about more abstract things, like arkigos said. You were talking about exclusively real, physical, and, frankly, _useful_ things. Essentially, Se tells you how things are and Te tells you how that's inefficient and shouldn't it work this way? and then Se fills in details and how that would physically work and here's another thing you could do with it and Te...

You get the picture. I'm never that handy or practical and I would never think that in depth about how Christmas lights work. I would just complain that they don't work well and then wander off into thinking about some Christmas-related story or how this music makes me feel.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Sporadic Aura said:


> Alright then you are 'bad' at sensing and absolutely inept at anything relating with the physical world. But, of course you and all other INTJ's aren't, to say they are is ridiculous. Without your inferior function it is impossible to fully use your primary function, as they work together in a tandem. INFP's are not 'bad' at thinking, INTP's are not 'bad' at feeling and ESFP's are not 'bad' at intuition. It is a preference.


You and I clearly don't understand this the same. Yes, I am definitely bad at sensing, because I have poor awareness of the world around me and my conscious focus is not spent on understanding sensory data, experience and detail; it is spent on the intuitive world. When I do express sensation, it is often done so in a crude and primitive way. I use too much force or too little as I cannot gauge the precise use I need to apply, or I over-indulge in a specific sensory experience such as getting stuck up on a spot on my shirt to the point I stop seeing anything else. I can only think about how much that spot annoys me. 

Yes, cognitive type is also a matter of cognitive preference, but when we prefer something over another, we will naturally repress, or if you will, let the other aspect of it wither. A very simple but powerful example is whether someone is right- or left-handed. No matter what hand the person prefer lest they be ambidextrous, they will possess greater accuracy and skill with one than the other. They can train the other hand that is being used less, but they will never gain the same level of proficiency as they do with their "primary" hand. Yet, if you will, the hand we prefer to use is a preference. Let's take handwriting as an example. If you are right-handed, you will find yourself more adept or if you will, flexible at what tasks you can perform and how to perform them. You can write in typical handwritten style, you can italicize, you can write some things in bold while others not, you can underline and so on and so forth. Now try this with your left hand. You will find that performing any of these tasks will be difficult. Just writing your name so it's readable might be difficult enough. You lack flexibility or skill. All because you happened to prefer your right hand which thus repressed your and use for your left hand. Yet, you will find that without the left hand writing will still be difficult because which hand is going to hold the paper still if not the left hand?


----------



## electricky (Feb 18, 2011)

It actually seems like some sort of thinking function is more involved.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

ElectricSparkle said:


> It actually seems like some sort of thinking function is more involved.


I'm inclined to agree. I actually think the OP could be a Ti-Fe type.


----------



## Psychopomp (Oct 3, 2012)

ephemereality said:


> I'm inclined to agree. I actually think the OP could be a Ti-Fe type.


I actually thought this as well, but on the subject of preference vs capability on lower functions, I think that perhaps what @_Sporadic Aura_ was speaking to is more the idea that ANY hint of 'N' is seen as an N typing... or, rather, that low order N types must either show no N at all or only show it in pathetic slogans. Low order N users can and do use 'N' well, but it is low-order N that they use well, not high order N.

I ultimately agree with you, but development arcs are such that an INTP could have 'worse' Ne than a well-developed ESFJ. Development is the wild card here, really. Also, role. Ni working in a subconscious support role can be very capable... they may suck at dominant Ni, but be very capable at inferior Ni.... which does not develop up the track, but rather in place, if developed correctly.

I've known ESFPs with 'better' inferior Ni than INTJs dominant Ni. If that same ESFP was to push Ni into a dominant conscious role, it would be a disaster.

Capability is somewhat decoupled from role and ordering. An ESFP might have a great sense of the lack of resonance in some logic they hear - due mainly to the excellence of their Se. Well-developed ones rather often do. An INTJ might get totally off-base by misreading the sensory aspect of it and buy into complete non-sense and false resonance. Whose 'Ni' and 'Te' worked better? Well, it worked better for the ESFP because of Se, and because of a well developed low order Ni. 

Thus, in a sense, it IS preference... but not in terms of sentiment, but in terms of cognition. What has cognitive precedence? Which fulfills what role? 'Preference' is a flawed and a loaded term, but it can work depending on what is mean by and understood of it.


----------



## WildChild (Jul 9, 2013)

Blue Flare said:


> Nope, if you're sure of being ESFP, then anything intuitive that you notice would be the work of inferior Ni. Ne works together with Si. There could be some confusions because Ne and Se are both extroverted perceiving functions, so what you think is Ne it's probably Ni being filtered through your Se. Se-doms don't value Ne, specially as it's the shadow function of Ni.


I'm not sure how you affirm Ne has to be used in conjunction with Si, or what basis you ground this affirmation on, but from experience while Ne indeed does rely on Si to an extent, it can also function via Se, just by taking in information and building upon it. 
Extraverted and introverted intuition are labeled as two different functions but IMO they are fundamentally the same thing, just used differently. Universally, intuition is associated with quick thinking and subconscious reasoning, drawing connections etc..

Furthermore, although patterns do emerge in people's mental functions (from which typology derives), I'm not sure you can draw conclusions onto other people's functions. For instance I'm an ISTP but I'm fairly I have pretty well developed functions that are not associated in my 4 main functions. We do use all 8 functions (you'd be pretty fucked without extraverted thinking for instance).

Anyway, to conclude, I wanted to say that OP may very well be using Ne. As he presents it, his use of Ne seems relatively rare for him to have pointed it out so; OP if you notice reocurring patterns of thought like that, you might want to recondiser your type (ENFP have high Ne).

End rant on J decisiveness


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

arkigos said:


> I actually thought this as well, but on the subject of preference vs capability on lower functions, I think that perhaps what @_Sporadic Aura_ was speaking to is more the idea that ANY hint of 'N' is seen as an N typing... or, rather, that low order N types must either show no N at all or only show it in pathetic slogans. Low order N users can and do use 'N' well, but it is low-order N that they use well, not high order N.
> 
> I ultimately agree with you, but development arcs are such that an INTP could have 'worse' Ne than a well-developed ESFJ. Development is the wild card here, really. Also, role. Ni working in a subconscious support role can be very capable... they may suck at dominant Ni, but be very capable at inferior Ni.... which does not develop up the track, but rather in place, if developed correctly.


This discussion here is useless unless you define what you mean by "development". Is development the same as egoic or consciousness? If yes, then I might agree with you, if no, but this more vague form of "developing type", then I don't, because I do not believe in that particular idea of psychological development. 



> I've known ESFPs with 'better' inferior Ni than INTJs dominant Ni. If that same ESFP was to push Ni into a dominant conscious role, it would be a disaster.


For example?



> Capability is somewhat decoupled from role and ordering. An ESFP might have a great sense of the lack of resonance in some logic they hear - due mainly to the excellence of their Se. Well-developed ones rather often do. An INTJ might get totally off-base by misreading the sensory aspect of it and buy into complete non-sense and false resonance. Whose 'Ni' and 'Te' worked better? Well, it worked better for the ESFP because of Se, and because of a well developed low order Ni.


But how is this an example of Ni? Isn't this just a good example of that the INTJ is in fact a sensortard to begin with being inferior sensation? In this case isn't not a good example of intuition. It's a good example of sensation. 



> Thus, in a sense, it IS preference... but not in terms of sentiment, but in terms of cognition. What has cognitive precedence? Which fulfills what role? 'Preference' is a flawed and a loaded term, but it can work depending on what is mean by and understood of it.


I think preference is rather simple to understand - it is that which we value more or find to be of more importance. This is also exactly what Jung thinks of the dominant versus the inferior. Anything of unconscious character i.e. the inferior, will be raw and unrefined because it is projected with emotionally charged content. This is for example why feeling for the feeling dominant type is not experienced as having anything to do with feelings but is in fact a very rational process. This is for example why the inferior Ni type can grow such extreme levels of superstition and paranoia. This is what inferior means.

I don't buy into the whole "low order" and "higher order" necessarily. I feel such categorization by placing it into a hierarchy kind of misses the point. The point with the inferior is that it will always be of a very raw and unrefined nature and when it is expressed, it is exactly that - so it appears very uncontrolled and thus, primitive or savage. It is thus not a category of hierarchy but it is a category of cognitive refinement. We can then categorize this refinement as more or less refined, but the inferior will always be very unrefined. That is why it is the inferior. One cannot for example have a developed inferior by having it refined. Then it is not an inferior but something else.


----------



## Psychopomp (Oct 3, 2012)

ephemereality said:


> This discussion here is useless unless you define what you mean by "development". Is development the same as egoic or consciousness? If yes, then I might agree with you, if no, but this more vague form of "developing type", then I don't, because I do not believe in that particular idea of psychological development.






ephemereality said:


> For example?


Say, an ESFJ comes up with an idea for a play that effectively helps change conceptual perceptions on bullying. This is the result of Ne working well in its place... in the subconscious, subjugated tertiary. An INTP might iterate through different nonsensical theories about why the bullying takes place, and hatch a hairbrained theory that is worthless. He is using auxiliary Ne badly, perhaps because of bad Si, admittedly, but in the layman's perspective it will be bad Ne... it will be ultimately bad Ne. The ESFJ will ultimately be good Ne, even if that Ne was in a subjugated and more subconscious aspect. 



ephemereality said:


> But how is this an example of Ni? Isn't this just a good example of that the INTJ is in fact a sensortard to begin with being inferior sensation? In this case isn't not a good example of intuition. It's a good example of sensation.


Yes, but that is going to reduce itself to semantics in the layman's perception... and perhaps not strictly true, which I will answer momentarily....



ephemereality said:


> I think preference is rather simple to understand - it is that which we value more or find to be of more importance. This is also exactly what Jung thinks of the dominant versus the inferior. Anything of unconscious character i.e. the inferior, will be raw and unrefined because it is projected with emotionally charged content. This is for example why feeling for the feeling dominant type is not experienced as having anything to do with feelings but is in fact a very rational process. This is for example why the inferior Ni type can grow such extreme levels of superstition and paranoia. This is what inferior means.
> 
> I don't buy into the whole "low order" and "higher order" necessarily. I feel such categorization by placing it into a hierarchy kind of misses the point. The point with the inferior is that it will always be of a very raw and unrefined nature and when it is expressed, it is exactly that - so it appears very uncontrolled and thus, primitive or savage. It is thus not a category of hierarchy but it is a category of cognitive refinement. We can then categorize this refinement as more or less refined, but the inferior will always be very unrefined. That is why it is the inferior. One cannot for example have a developed inferior by having it refined. Then it is not an inferior but something else.


Well, low/high order are just words... it's a simple symbol. I agree wholeheartedly with what you say about 'refinement', and that is only considerable when it is consciously manifest or 'given the reins'. In a low positioning, it may indeed keep this refinement, but again, to 'objective' eyes, layman's eyes, we will see it working well, for whatever reason, as the product that is attributable to it is capable and refined. It is ultimately true that, say, my Fe remains unrefined, and that it is other functions interacting with that which allows it to produce efficaciously, and that 'developed' Fe is a vulgar and ultimately inaccurate term... but it is nevertheless true that a 'developed' INTP will have better efficacy and good result from their inferior Fe than an 'undeveloped' one. 

Regardless of whether an ESFP can affect the refinement of their Ni, they can come to gain better result from it, which can and will be seen as high functioning Ni.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

arkigos said:


> Say, an ESFJ comes up with an idea for a play that effectively helps change conceptual perceptions on bullying. This is the result of Ne working well in its place... in the subconscious, subjugated tertiary. An INTP might iterate through different nonsensical theories about why the bullying takes place, and hatch a hairbrained theory that is worthless. He is using auxiliary Ne badly, perhaps because of bad Si, admittedly, but in the layman's perspective it will be bad Ne... it will be ultimately bad Ne. The ESFJ will ultimately be good Ne, even if that Ne was in a subjugated and more subconscious aspect.


Isn't this more a lack of extroversion in general from the INTP's part? 



> Yes, but that is going to reduce itself to semantics in the layman's perception... and perhaps not strictly true, which I will answer momentarily....
> 
> 
> 
> Well, low/high order are just words... it's a simple symbol. I agree wholeheartedly with what you say about 'refinement', and that is only considerable when it is consciously manifest or 'given the reins'. In a low positioning, it may indeed keep this refinement, but again, to 'objective' eyes, layman's eyes, we will see it working well, for whatever reason, as the product that is attributable to it is capable and refined. It is ultimately true that, say, my Fe remains unrefined, and that it is other functions interacting with that which allows it to produce efficaciously, and that 'developed' Fe is a vulgar and ultimately inaccurate term... but it is nevertheless true that a 'developed' INTP will have better efficacy and good result from their inferior Fe than an 'undeveloped' one.


You have to remember if there's something I have little interest in here, is to discuss anything at a "lay" level. 



> Regardless of whether an ESFP can affect the refinement of their Ni, they can come to gain better result from it, which can and will be seen as high functioning Ni.


Not sure I agree with this conclusion. The only difference here is that I think an ESFP can be more _accepting_ in the same vein of their Ni being more black and white, of things that may to an INTJ seem a bit more nonsensical. This can be both good and bad. Needless superstition is bad, but being able to question a situation no one else is questioning is good.


----------



## Psychopomp (Oct 3, 2012)

ephemereality said:


> Isn't this more a lack of extroversion in general from the INTP's part?
> 
> You have to remember if there's something I have little interest in here, is to discuss anything at a "lay" level.
> 
> Not sure I agree with this conclusion. The only difference here is that I think an ESFP can be more _accepting_ in the same vein of their Ni being more black and white, of things that may to an INTJ seem a bit more nonsensical. This can be both good and bad. Needless superstition is bad, but being able to question a situation no one else is questioning is good.


It suddenly occurs to me that it is the effective suppression rather than the 'development' of some function that might result in greater efficacy or product from it. So, rather than developing the functions, instead it's putting them in their place. 

It's bad thinking to say that, say, an ESFJ has 'well developed' Ti... rather, they have Si in such a place that it doesn't attempt to invoke it directly, causing a neurotic and convoluted implosion. 

The thing is, I know ESFJs who are entirely logical people, and thus would be said to get good use from Ti - and thus be said to have a 'well developed' Ti. ... but, I suppose that isn't true. Perhaps more true, their Ti doesn't get in the way or cause problems. In this case they must obtain that logic from others? This would feed back into an observation that part of the reason those 'well developed' ESFPs I interact with do so well with is because they are surrounded by N types, and they are good at sucking data out of us... and this gives the appearance of 'well developed' Ni? They get a lot of good data from good sources, and Ni doesn't need to be invoked.

Interesting.


----------



## pianodog (Jan 25, 2013)

Is it also Ni that when I look at an old house I get ideas about who lived there and why it was left loke that . If there is a bicycle left out, Id wonder whos it was and why it was there. This is why I was on the border line between ENFP and ESFP because I do look for meaning in nearly everything but Im so aware of my senses, its confusing. Though its probably Ni working through Se. Apparently, ENFP dont notice small details and he meaning of something is more obvious than the way it looks. So in a way, I could be an Se with a very developed Ni or something. Seeing how I first notice the way something looks then I think of underlying meaning, but appeareance is more obvious.


----------



## Psychopomp (Oct 3, 2012)

pianodog said:


> Is it also Ni that when I look at an old house I get ideas about who lived there and why it was left loke that . If there is a bicycle left out, Id wonder whos it was and why it was there. This is why I was on the border line between ENFP and ESFP because I do look for meaning in nearly everything but Im so aware of my senses, its confusing. Though its probably Ni working through Se. Apparently, ENFP dont notice small details and he meaning of something is more obvious than the way it looks. So in a way, I could be an Se with a very developed Ni or something. Seeing how I first notice the way something looks then I think of underlying meaning, but appeareance is more obvious.


That isn't what is meant by the 'meaning' of something, in the context of Ne. Rule of thumb: could you picture the answer in your mind or touch it with your hand? If so, it's sensory. T seeks to provide logical rationality for an event, which surely had a part in your experience... F seeks to provide 'meaning', worth or value, to the event... which surely had a part in your experience.... N perceives the conceptual aspect of the event, S comprehends how the appearance of the event might associate or disassociate from other things. 

Thus, your experience was probably Se and T, though there is always some influence from F to provide motivation or interest... and a deeply subconscious and peripheral N aspect. You'll have to show some intangible aspect to the scenario to show N in conscious use.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

arkigos said:


> It suddenly occurs to me that it is the effective suppression rather than the 'development' of some function that might result in greater efficacy or product from it. So, rather than developing the functions, instead it's putting them in their place.
> 
> It's bad thinking to say that, say, an ESFJ has 'well developed' Ti... rather, they have Si in such a place that it doesn't attempt to invoke it directly, causing a neurotic and convoluted implosion.
> 
> ...


I don't know man. There are two people on this forum I know for a fact are ESFJs and to be quite honest, almost no matter how you define logic, they are very suck at it. They do not, and cannot, utilize logic the way you and I express logic. They cannot think impersonally; they can only think in terms of values. Is that a form of logic? Yes. Jung expressed as much himself. It is not however, even in the common sense of the word, logic in itself. That people seem to think they are logical and intelligent and so on, could be because of other reasons unrelated to their Jungian cognition i.e. they are seen to be overall intelligent by their peers. 

Doing impersonal categories, measurements, hierarchies, formulate logical systems and so on. They cannot do that. Ask them to define a specific concept they will start talk about _values_ they see relating to said concepts or they might even remain entirely silent, refusing to answer the question to begin with. They will not however, say something such as X means Y. Why? Inferior thinking. 

It's the same thing with my ESFP friend. I have to actively point out Ni content to her. I can for example say, hey look, you see that image over there? It means such and such. Represents this and that. She will go "ooh" because she cannot see this herself. She is not very naturally inclined to think this way even though I am. Yet, quite hilariously so I have to say, I sent a photo to her the other day of my two cats while they were sleeping together in my bed and she tells me, "Put away that plate lmao" over Skype. I immediately went wtf, what plate? It eventually turned out that plate had been there for a very long time, unbeknownst to me, even though I am the one who put it there in the first place, and she had noticed it in some other picture I had sent her some time ago. I didn't even see the damn plate even when I looked at the picture I sent her! I had to check on my actual bed to see it. She's just very good at noticing details like that. I for example remember we were watching this video of some guy we were trying to type and she went, "oh look, he did that thing according to that Reinin trait (because we were studying that guy's sociotype)" and I was like huh? Where did he do that? She had to point it out to me because I didn't notice at all. I was so consumed trying to understand their thoughts such actual concrete details completely flew my by. That's how repressed sensation is. Yet I think that in a situation that really requires active moment like a panic situation, I might be the one mobilizing people as opposed to her.

When we talk about the repression of the inferior, it's not just even a preference of the dominant, but it really is refusing to consciously perform any action where you can take in such information about the world around you. Because we refuse such a cognitive perspective in our minds, it will as such naturally be inflexible. How can something you essentially claim isn't there be of good quality? It's lack of awareness but it's also an unwillingness to partake in actions that require such cognitive structure. One might even argue that it is in fact the raw nature of the inferior that gives so much strength to the dominant and this is pretty much how Jung would have argued it as well. It is the fact that the inferior sensation of the Ni dominant is so unrefined that allows the Ni type to take in as much information as he does in this very raw way, and because it lacks refinement it allows him to also more deeply engage in Ni content.


----------



## randomshoes (Dec 11, 2013)

pianodog said:


> Is it also Ni that when I look at an old house I get ideas about who lived there and why it was left loke that . If there is a bicycle left out, Id wonder whos it was and why it was there. This is why I was on the border line between ENFP and ESFP because I do look for meaning in nearly everything but Im so aware of my senses, its confusing. Though its probably Ni working through Se. Apparently, ENFP dont notice small details and he meaning of something is more obvious than the way it looks. So in a way, I could be an Se with a very developed Ni or something. Seeing how I first notice the way something looks then I think of underlying meaning, but appeareance is more obvious.


Are you coming up with one uniting theory for the whole house, or a bunch of little theories for each little detail?


----------



## idoh (Oct 24, 2013)

have you considered if you are an enfj roud:
@pianodog


----------



## Ravenetta (Oct 23, 2013)

The OP sounds more like a Te or Ti issue because of its problem solving nature applied to specific, concrete objects. 

Ni and Ne tend to be more focused on processing the intangible. Ne organizes that sort of thing like a daisy chain or web, and Ni like a tree with branches. Ne can move between ideas and connect concepts that no one else can, and Ni attempts to organize a sense of reality.

Ni might use Christmas lights as a metaphor somehow, and Ne might use them in some completely unexpected way.


----------



## pianodog (Jan 25, 2013)

idoh said:


> have you considered if you are an enfj roud:
> @_pianodog_


Uh yeah, I don't think so. I don't have Fe, or do I? But I'm probably not that because senses are stronger to me than my feelings for others. But I'm definitely not a J, I'm more spontaneous and random, I have no structure to my day, I just do things. I dunno though, I might be off base with my knowledge of personality types. It's hard to tell, I know I care about other people alot but not on a global scale sort of way.


----------



## pianodog (Jan 25, 2013)

randomshoes said:


> Are you coming up with one uniting theory for the whole house, or a bunch of little theories for each little detail?


That's hard to answer but I think it would be I see a bicycle and a old house, I might imagine a family or a child that was abused or even murdered, or that some old man lost his daughter and left her bike outside for all these years as a sense of security. But I see this happening, it isn't just an abstract idea.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

pianodog said:


> Uh yeah, I don't think so. I don't have Fe, or do I? But I'm probably not that because senses are stronger to me than my feelings for others. But I'm definitely not a J, I'm more spontaneous and random, I have no structure to my day, I just do things. I dunno though, I might be off base with my knowledge of personality types. It's hard to tell, I know I care about other people alot but not on a global scale sort of way.


What argument do you have against Fe?


----------



## Carmine Ermine (Mar 11, 2012)

Sounds like Se to me, often when I'm trying to fix something I imagine how what I need would look, even if it maybe hasn't been invented yet (like you thinking of the type of connector you need). Often I try some things like with my steamer where steam comes out from all the sides instead of just the top, you can't just put something heavy on top to correct it, because there's a handle on top there to lift it off. You have to put something steady round the handle and then something heavy on top. A heavy cup might do it, but I looked around for something better, and saw a roll of duck tape and a rock - that was much better, now it works perfectly.


----------



## pianodog (Jan 25, 2013)

> What argument do you have against Fe?


It would be this


> The "social graces," such as being polite, being nice, being friendly, being considerate, and being appropriate, often revolve around the process of extraverted Feeling.
> Keeping in touch, laughing at jokes when others laugh, and trying to get people to act kindly to each other also involve extraverted Feeling.


 I do not have those "social graces". I usually am very awkward and uncomfortable when needing to change my behavior in order to talk in a different context than family and friends. I often find myself "fake" expressing my emotions for things because I didn't think they were that funny but I don't wanna look like I have no sense of humor, though anyone around me would never say I didn't. I'm much more of an Fi because I feel like I express my emotions with actions not words. And I have those gut feelings about mood, and things like that. So I have to make myself say thank you, how are you and stuff like that because it doesn't come naturally. I feel it definitely, but the desire to verbally share just isn't there. I would rather show it through how I act around someone.


----------



## idoh (Oct 24, 2013)

pianodog said:


> Uh yeah, I don't think so. I don't have Fe, or do I? But I'm probably not that because senses are stronger to me than my feelings for others. But I'm definitely not a J, I'm more spontaneous and random, I have no structure to my day, I just do things. I dunno though, I might be off base with my knowledge of personality types. It's hard to tell, I know I care about other people alot but not on a global scale sort of way.


answer my nooby question! :happy::
when your friend is hurt, how helpful are you? can you automatically understand why they are feeling that way or do you try to feel what they are feeling to understand what they are going through (this could also be if you had a similar experience to them, which is how you understand their emotions?) ? or simplified would you say you try to understand why someone is feeling the way they are or what they are feeling


----------



## pianodog (Jan 25, 2013)

idoh said:


> answer my nooby question! :happy::
> when your friend is hurt, how helpful are you? can you automatically understand why they are feeling that way or do you try to feel what they are feeling to understand what they are going through (this could also be if you had a similar experience to them, which is how you understand their emotions?) ? or simplified would you say you try to understand why someone is feeling the way they are or what they are feeling


I think I usually seem feel what they feel. I do care alot about people's problems but It's all personal, not impersonal like Fe is. Yeah, when someone is upset (for a serious reason), I feel like crap, I get upset myself but I don't let it out, it's not like me to do that. I could almost say I feel what they feel to some degree, although I'm not always aware of that, I can feel when someone else feels a certain way, even if I'm unsure of what they're feeling exactly, I can feel good or bad based on how they feel.

For example, if there is conflict between someone, even subtle, I get very anxious. If someone is excited and happy, I will get happy as well, it triggers me to talk about lots of stuff. When people get tense, I keep very quiet because I don't feel like talking when their is tension.


----------



## idoh (Oct 24, 2013)

pianodog said:


> I think I usually seem feel what they feel. I do care alot about people's problems but It's all personal, not impersonal like Fe is. Yeah, when someone is upset (for a serious reason), I feel like crap, I get upset myself but I don't let it out, it's not like me to do that. I could almost say I feel what they feel to some degree, although I'm not always aware of that, I can feel when someone else feels a certain way, even if I'm unsure of what they're feeling exactly, I can feel good or bad based on how they feel.
> 
> For example, if there is conflict between someone, even subtle, I get very anxious. If someone is excited and happy, I will get happy as well, it triggers me to talk about lots of stuff. When people get tense, I keep very quiet because I don't feel like talking when their is tension.


oh i should have been more specific! i don't mean how you are affected, i mean if someone needs your help and they are unhealthy, what is your approach to helping them? do you understand why they are feeling that way, or do you have to first feel what they are feeling to understand them


----------



## pianodog (Jan 25, 2013)

I basically put myself in their place. Unhealthy, I would try to convince them first that you don't have to eat less to lose weight, or that you can live a long life just like those 80 year old women in the Mediterranean that still work in the garden with no problem getting around. So I would check up on this person fairly often to check what they've been doing. My brother wants to lose weight, he's made alot of progress but I get on his nerves because I tend to complain about it when he eats badly or doesn't want to exercise. I feel like it's my duty or something to help him, really weird though, it's not like I'm a nagging mom, more like an obsessed guidance counselor. 

If they don't want to listen, I have a hard time seeing things from other people's perspectives.
I feel trapped like if I don't do something to help this person, I'm not doing what I should be doing. I usually feel obligated to help people, I feel obligated to give money to others and buy them nice Christmas presents Not by anyone else, I feel this is part of my personality, I am unselfish and forgive, I sometimes have a funny attitude about it, but I can't do otherwise, it would make me feel terrible. Not that I do this all the time but when it's possible, I like to do it. And I don't do it flashy either, I like an acknowledgement but it's in a meek way, I don't like to be flaunted as "hey look what I did". Now if it's something I did for fun or art, heck I want to show it off, but not my acts of kindness. Therefore, I almost would say I try to force them in my shoes, it doesn't work usually but sometimes it will, I try to get them to see it my way and I want to help them.


----------



## idoh (Oct 24, 2013)

pianodog said:


> I basically put myself in their place. Unhealthy, I would try to convince them first that you don't have to eat less to lose weight, or that you can live a long life just like those 80 year old women in the Mediterranean that still work in the garden with no problem getting around. So I would check up on this person fairly often to check what they've been doing. My brother wants to lose weight, he's made alot of progress but I get on his nerves because I tend to complain about it when he eats badly or doesn't want to exercise. I feel like it's my duty or something to help him, really weird though, it's not like I'm a nagging mom, more like an obsessed guidance counselor.
> 
> If they don't want to listen, I have a hard time seeing things from other people's perspectives.
> I feel trapped like if I don't do something to help this person, I'm not doing what I should be doing. I usually feel obligated to help people, I feel obligated to give money to others and buy them nice Christmas presents Not by anyone else, I feel this is part of my personality, I am unselfish and forgive, I sometimes have a funny attitude about it, but I can't do otherwise, it would make me feel terrible. Not that I do this all the time but when it's possible, I like to do it. And I don't do it flashy either, I like an acknowledgement but it's in a meek way, I don't like to be flaunted as "hey look what I did". Now if it's something I did for fun or art, heck I want to show it off, but not my acts of kindness. Therefore, I almost would say I try to force them in my shoes, it doesn't work usually but sometimes it will, I try to get them to see it my way and I want to help them.


ok haha that is definitely Fi (if i know it correctly x.x)

i think you are esfp. when i said unhealthy, i never said it meant overweight. it could be mental, emotional, or underweight. so is taking things in literally sensor or intuitive? i guess you could still be intuitive so i would say exfp definitely :tongue:


----------



## pianodog (Jan 25, 2013)

idoh said:


> ok haha that is definitely Fi (if i know it correctly x.x)
> 
> i think you are esfp. when i said unhealthy, i never said it meant overweight. it could be mental, emotional, or underweight. so is taking things in literally sensor or intuitive? i guess you could still be intuitive so i would say exfp definitely :tongue:


Oh ok, sorry, I just talked about what came to mind. I feel like a sensor, I seem to be so in tune with my surroundings but then again, I do get alot of crazy ideas. Hmm, it's confusing. Any more ways to test Se vs Ne?


----------



## idoh (Oct 24, 2013)

pianodog said:


> Oh ok, sorry, I just talked about what came to mind. I feel like a sensor, I seem to be so in tune with my surroundings but then again, I do get alot of crazy ideas. Hmm, it's confusing. Any more ways to test Se vs Ne?


well i don't think (or know) if you pick esfp that it means you can't use Ne. i can't really order my cognitive functions because i just feel like i use all of them at times and the difference of usage between them is probably small  but i at least know my first two functions. so if you are sure that you are an extrovert then you could just try reading descriptions. here, i found one i think is pretty good:



MrShatter said:


> I call Ni/Se the detective.
> 
> Se - collects clues
> Ni - uses those clues to predict a future situation.
> ...


http://personalitycafe.com/cognitive-functions/66255-difference-between-ni-se-ne-si.html


----------

