# Introverted Thinking and Introverted iNtuition



## L (Aug 12, 2011)

Kind of like a compare and contrast. 

I just got to thinking about how different the attitudes are in a person when they think about something. People predisposed to an Ni way of thinking are supposed to have the greatest insight of people but then there is Ti and it deconstructs things in a logical framework for the person. 

Besides the fact that Ti is a judging function and Ni is a perceiving function, which would yield greater insight, do you think?


----------



## Dyslexicon (Mar 9, 2013)

None.


----------



## Bardo (Dec 4, 2012)

Ni-Fe-Ti-Se

Ni is where I get my iNsight as it is an inward sight, introverted/inward perception. Ti is a judgement function and makes descisions upon what is perceived. I wouldn't describe it as having insight, it has decisions to make, it makes structure from Ni material for me.

So I don't think you can compare the two in the way you are asking, because without one I don't have the other. Someone that has Ti and Ne - their insight would come from Si.


----------



## 22857 (May 31, 2011)

It depends what you mean by insight. 

For defining insight, if it's to be correct (which is what I take insight to be, incorrect insight isn't really insight, it's just imagination), I'm sure it takes a perceiving function and then a judging function to form the greater insight. 

That being said, I think Ti would yield greater insight than Ni, technically.


----------



## sinigang (May 5, 2012)

Doesn't intuition also mean insight? Therefore Ni = more insight because it is a form of intuition.


----------



## DAPHNE XO (Jan 16, 2012)

I think a great way to look at it in this context would be Ti would ask '_what_ is this?', while Ni would ask '_why _is this?'.


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy (Nov 22, 2012)

I think they both are the hallmark of what society's current opinion on what "intelligence" and "teh smartiklez" are (which I don't agree with, IMO, the nonobjective concept of intelligence is much more complicated than that).

Here's the wikisocion definition of the two (they transfer to MBTI very similarly)

Ni -  the ability to recognize the unfolding of processes over time (how one event leads to another), have visions of the past and future, develop mental imagery, and see intangible hints of relationships between processes or objects.

Ti -  the ability to recognize logical consistency and correctness, generate and apply classifications and systems, organize systematic and conceptual understanding, see logical connections between things (including logical similarities, differences, and correlations) by means of instinctive feelings of validity and symmetry

Two very different functions.


----------



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

l've come to roughly the same conclusions as Ni users. l couldn't really tell the difference with an old INTJ, l think my Ti-Ne basically came out looking identical to his Ni.

And l'm not even sure how much Ne influenced that. l've always seen the connection between seemingly unrelated ideas by classifying them in the first place, which is Ti. l can see the areas where l think l apply Ne but from the description of Ti above, l can at least see more concrete examples of Ti in my mental framework.

Maybe Se-ti users even score as intuitives on tests and l'm an imposter.


----------



## Recede (Nov 23, 2011)

I still wonder on occasion if I might really be an INTP and not an INFJ...



ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> I think they both are the hallmark of what society's current opinion on what "intelligence" and "teh smartiklez" are (which I don't agree with, IMO, the nonobjective concept of intelligence is much more complicated than that).
> 
> Here's the wikisocion definition of the two (they transfer to MBTI very similarly)
> 
> ...


I don't relate to that description of Ni. I'm not at all focused on the future or making predictions. Instead my intuition is focused on the nature of concepts and perception. It's been said that while Ne thinks outside the box, Ni leads us to think _about _the box. Here are a few of my posts I think reflect my Ni:



> _But I know there are many ways to look at this and to define these concepts, and it almost feels wrong to explain it in only one way. In my head I see these concepts as flexible and dynamic, but when I try to put this into words it seems to lose that quality. So I want to at least mention some other ways to look at this._





> I view envy not so much as a simple comparison but as an overarching pattern of obsessive self-awareness. It's there whether or not there is someone to compare yourself to. When we are self-aware in the presence of someone else, we are aware of how we are different, so we would then call that a comparison. Funny how concepts make subtle shifts like that with a simple change in context, isn't it?





> There's another role, however: the role of the listener. And the listener's role is to try to determine what message the speaker was trying to convey. To do this, the listener must detach from his or her own subjective interpretation of the words, realizing that misunderstanding very often occurs when the speaker's and listener's interpretations of the words themselves don't match up perfectly. For example, "The door is ajar" to you has a very negative connotation, yet to me it simply means the door is slightly open, and this difference in perception could potentially lead to misinterpretations if we were talk about a door being ajar. The listener's job is to take the simplest, most objective meaning of the words and not add anything to it. To the listener, the words themselves are not important--the only thing that matters is that the meaning, intention, and feelings of the speaker are understood.
> 
> That is how I perceive communication.


I see Ni as the filter of my perception. It leads me to perceive things in certain ways, and it's also responsible for insight and ideas. Ti checks over my ideas to make sure they're logically consistent, and then organizes them into words, finding the most concise and accurate way to convey them.


----------



## Deus Absconditus (Feb 27, 2011)

If by greater insight, you mean knows the introverted world more i would go with Ni. The way I see it is if Ne looks behind the extraverted world in search for underlying meanings, and patterns then Ni would look behind the introverted world. So while Ti may analyze the introverted world, and searches to understand it, Ni just "knows" it.


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy (Nov 22, 2012)

Silveresque said:


> It's been said that while Ne thinks outside the box, Ni leads us to think about the box.


No. Stray away from over-simplified definitions of functions like that. They have multiple ways to perceive them, and they're just not very accurate to begin with. 



 said:


> nature of concepts and perception.


If you look at the definition of Ti, it could easily be what you described there. 



 said:


> _But I know there are many ways to look at this and to define these concepts, and it almost feels wrong to explain it in only one way. In my head I see these concepts as flexible and dynamic, but when I try to put this into words it seems to lose that quality. So I want to at least mention some other ways to look at this._


Okay, this could easily be Ne because you are looking for different possibilities. It could be Ni also though, because it appear you are making connections and relationships that are intangible you have trouble putting it into words.



 said:


> _
> I view envy not so much as a simple comparison but as an overarching pattern of obsessive self-awareness. It's there whether or not there is someone to compare yourself to. When we are self-aware in the presence of someone else, we are aware of how we are different, so we would then call that a comparison. Funny how concepts make subtle shifts like that with a simple change in context, isn't it?
> 
> _


_

__Thi_s actually does look more like Ti. 

_


 said:



There's another role, however: the role of the listener. And the listener's role is to try to determine what message the speaker was trying to convey. To do this, the listener must detach from his or her own subjective interpretation of the words, realizing that misunderstanding very often occurs when the speaker's and listener's interpretations of the words themselves don't match up perfectly. For example, "The door is ajar" to you has a very negative connotation, yet to me it simply means the door is slightly open, and this difference in perception could potentially lead to misinterpretations if we were talk about a door being ajar. The listener's job is to take the simplest, most objective meaning of the words and not add anything to it. To the listener, the words themselves are not important--the only thing that matters is that the meaning, intention, and feelings of the speaker are understood.

Click to expand...

_


 said:


> _That is how I perceive communication._


_

_This sounds exactly like something I'd come up with. Very Ti, IMO. 


The way you described your Ni at the end is the way all functions are. And then you can actually describe Ti for what it is, interesting. I think you could be an INFJ, I just see a lot of Ti in you. If you typed yourself as an INFJ due to the Fe, you very well be a Ti-dom struggling with inferior Fe. Inferior functions are actually the second most 'powerful' function in the MBTI model and it is what subconsciously drives the user.


----------



## Recede (Nov 23, 2011)

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> No. Stray away from over-simplified definitions of functions like that. They have multiple ways to perceive them, and they're just not very accurate to begin with.


What's oversimplified about it? It may be a short description, but it says quite a bit. It's getting at the idea that Ne is divergent and Ni is convergent. Ne looks at possibilities (divergent - this, or that, or that...) and Ni, being an introverted function, focuses in on the conceptual and nonverbal, looking at the same thing from different angles and subconsciously bringing in connections from other ideas. 

I know this is far from a perfect explanation and it's really hard to put into words. And don't get me wrong, I'm fully aware that both functions do both things, it's just that Ne does more of the divergent thinking/perception and Ni does more convergent.



ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> If you look at the definition of Ti, it could easily be what you described there.


Yes, it could be. But the difference is that Ni perceives it through visual imagery while Ti rationally deduces it. I do both, but the perception happens first and is then followed by a process of logically justifying it. 



ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> Okay, this could easily be Ne because you are looking for different possibilities. It could be Ni also though, because *it appear you are making connections and relationships that are intangible you have trouble putting it into words.*


Exactly. It's because I had an intangible mental map of the idea that was dynamic and flexible that I wanted to explain it in more than one way, to try to capture some of the flexibility of idea as it was represented in my head. This is still convergent. 



ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> > I view envy not so much as a simple comparison but as an overarching pattern of obsessive self-awareness. It's there whether or not there is someone to compare yourself to. *When we are self-aware in the presence of someone else, we are aware of how we are different, so we would then call that a comparison. Funny how concepts make subtle shifts like that with a simple change in context, isn't it?*
> 
> 
> This actually does look more like Ti.


It can be Ti, but it can certainly also be Ni because it's looking at the relationship between concepts and context and making connections. This is something both Ni and Ti do.



ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> This sounds exactly like something I'd come up with. Very Ti, IMO.


Yes, this one has a lot of Ti. But the perceptions and conceptual mapping behind it is very Ni. It's really hard to tell though from what was actually written, so maybe this wasn't such a good example. It's hard to see Ni because it's a perception, not a judgment. Easy to see Ti, especially because the ideas and connections Ni comes up with will be translated by Ti, so you don't necessarily see the underlying perceptual process.



ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> The way you described your Ni at the end is the way all functions are. And then you can actually describe Ti for what it is, interesting. I think you could be an INFJ, I just see a lot of Ti in you. If you typed yourself as an INFJ due to the Fe, you very well be a Ti-dom struggling with inferior Fe. Inferior functions are actually the second most 'powerful' function in the MBTI model and it is what subconsciously drives the user.


I wasn't really describing Ni at the end and didn't go into any detail because I'd already given examples of it. Instead I was focused on explaining what Ti does with my Ni's perceptions and ideas.

I didn't type myself as an INFJ due to Fe. My Fe is very weak because given my reclusive nature it hasn't had much chance to develop. I seem to have heavy use of both Ni and Ti. It's possible I'm really an INTP, but my Ne and Si are very weak and I've been told I seem like an NF.


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy (Nov 22, 2012)

Silveresque said:


> What's oversimplified about it? It may be a short description, but it says quite a bit. It's getting at the idea that Ne is divergent and Ni is convergent. Ne looks at possibilities (divergent - this, or that, or that...) and Ni, being an introverted function, focuses in on the conceptual and nonverbal, looking at the same thing from different angles and subconsciously bringing in connections from other ideas.
> 
> I know this is far from a perfect explanation and it's really hard to put into words. And don't get me wrong, I'm fully aware that both functions do both things, it's just that Ne does more of the divergent thinking/perception and Ni does more convergent.
> 
> ...


Because it has multiple interpretations and isn't very accurate to begin with. The divergent vs convergent thing is pretty accurate, but might confuse people. Like if someone has auxiliary Ne and dominant Ti, he might just think he has dominant Ni, because Ti is, by nature, convergent in terms of trying to find the logical and objective 'truth' in a situation or idea. 

Well, all you said was 'looks at nature of "concepts and perceives." 

And you completely ignore the Ne side of things. Lol. Yes, that way of thinking is Ni. 

Indeed, Ni makes connections and Ti makes logical connections.

If you're an INFJ, you do realize that Ti is your least influential function, yes? You should also look at inferior Se vs inferior Fe

Weak Fe points even more toward inferior Fe. I think it's a real possibility that you could be confusing Ni for Ti-Ne. And again, the tertiary is the least influential function, so of course you'll have weak Si. Also, 'seeming like an NF' isn't even a valid factor to consider. I think it's a real possibility you are an INFJ, but I see Ti/Fe. You also have a really blatant bias towards INFJ. You were almost debating with me on it. Maybe take a step back, and try to look at it from an objective angle? Just a suggestion, not trying to be mean about it.

Good luck.


----------



## Recede (Nov 23, 2011)

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> If you're an INFJ, you do realize that Ti is your least influential function, yes? You should also look at inferior Se vs inferior Fe


Inferior Fe has always fit better than inferior Se, but I've wondered if undeveloped Fe could look like inferior Fe. Like I said, I could be an INTP but it's hard to tell. Neither type is a perfect fit. And why does Ti have to be my least influential function? There are plenty of people with strong tertiary functions. 



ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> Weak Fe points even more toward inferior Fe. I think it's a real possibility that you could be confusing Ni for Ti-Ne. And again, the tertiary is the least influential function, so of course you'll have weak Si. Also, 'seeming like an NF' isn't even a valid factor to consider. I think it's a real possibility you are an INFJ, but I see Ti/Fe. You also have a really blatant bias towards INFJ. You were almost debating with me on it. Maybe take a step back, and try to look at it from an objective angle? Just a suggestion, not trying to be mean about it.
> 
> Good luck.


Yes, the possibility of confusing Ni with Ti/Ne is what's had me wondering if I might be an INTP, but I haven't been able to find enough information on how to tell the difference between Ni/Ti and Ti/Ne. 

Blatant bias?  I don't know why you think that since I've said more than once that I could be an INTP. I'm not attached to my INFJ label and will change if I have sufficient reason to believe I'm a different type. I do tend to change my type frequently.


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy (Nov 22, 2012)

Silveresque said:


> Inferior Fe has always fit better than inferior Se, but I've wondered if undeveloped Fe could look like inferior Fe. Like I said, I could be an INTP but it's hard to tell. Neither type is a perfect fit. And why does Ti have to be my least influential function? There are plenty of people with strong tertiary functions.


strong =/= influential

Tertiary is the least influential, by definition in the MBTI, and somewhat in the Jungian, model.



Silveresque said:


> Yes, the possibility of confusing Ni with Ti/Ne is what's had me wondering if I might be an INTP, but I haven't been able to find enough information on how to tell the difference between Ni/Ti and Ti/Ne.
> 
> Blatant bias?  I don't know why you think that since I've said more than once that I could be an INTP. I'm not attached to my INFJ label and will change if I have sufficient reason to believe I'm a different type. I do tend to change my type frequently.


I said that because, again, you were practically debating the INFJ possibility. Sorry if I misunderstood. Good luck again. 

BTW, if it's any help, I had a lot of trouble deciding between INTP and INFJ for the same reasons as you.


----------



## Recede (Nov 23, 2011)

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> BTW, if it's any help, I had a lot of trouble deciding between INTP and INFJ for the same reasons as you.


What made you decide, if you don't mind my asking?


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy (Nov 22, 2012)

Silveresque said:


> What made you decide, if you don't mind my asking?


My realization that I was confusing Ni for Ti-Ne. I've always known that I think in a logical manner, ever since a very young age and my thoughts are very divergent when _perceiving_ things. I also think about and explain processes and/or events in stages. Like A happened, B happened, and then C happened. Ni will think of the entire event in one sequence and interconnected process. A lead to B and B lead to C, and C is the basic equivalent of A, etcetera. 

I'm sure there were many other factors, but those are the ones I can think of right now.


----------



## Yedra (Jul 28, 2012)

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> If you're an INFJ, you do realize that Ti is your least influential function, yes?


I wouldn't put it this way. I'll go out on a limb and say that the Ji functions are the most frequently used in any type. That is not to say that everyone engages those processes with the same intensity. To know things one must be able to discern. We gather information via our perceiving functions but to distinguish between pieces of information and to know that one is perceiving in the first place Ji has to be engaged. Whether one will analyze something to the very last detail and build complex systems or analyze only as much as is necessary for one to get by in life is a different matter but Ji is inseparable from the perceiving functions.

INFJs perceive things in broad pictures. Their Ni always works in tandem with Ti. But Ti in this case only serves to discern the most salient points of a picture, it gives just enough clarity to what would otherwise be a meaningless blur. 
In comparison an ISTP's main focus is analysis not context. An ISTP recognizes components of a smaller picture with precision, while the INFJ uses rougher outlines to navigate a greater inner landscape.

When any thought whatsoever can be expanded so much to end up pondering the meaning of life, then engaging Ti can be very tiring to an INFJ. When one considers a lot in the broadest of contexts, trying to analyze it to the minute details is precisely that - tiring. But INFJs can develop their Ti with conscious effort pretty well.


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy (Nov 22, 2012)

Yedra said:


> I wouldn't put it this way. I'll go out on a limb and say that the Ji functions are the most frequently used in any type. That is not to say that everyone engages those processes with the same intensity. To know things one must be able to discern. We gather information via our perceiving functions but to distinguish between pieces of information and to know that one is perceiving in the first place Ji has to be engaged. Whether one will analyze something to the very last detail and build complex systems or analyze only as much as is necessary for one to get by in life is a different matter but Ji is inseparable from the perceiving functions.
> 
> INFJs perceive things in broad pictures. Their Ni always works in tandem with Ti. But Ti in this case only serves to discern the most salient points of a picture, it gives just enough clarity to what would otherwise be a meaningless blur.
> In comparison an ISTP's main focus is analysis not context. An ISTP recognizes components of a smaller picture with precision, while the INFJ uses rougher outlines to navigate a greater inner landscape.
> ...


This isn't a type specific thing... According to the MBTI model, the tertiary is the least influential function. Some people even debate its existence.


----------



## Yedra (Jul 28, 2012)

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> This isn't a type specific thing... According to the MBTI model, the tertiary is the least influential function. Some people even debate its existence.


According to me it isn't. 
So the MBTI says the tertiary is not influential and we're supposed to just accept it or what?


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy (Nov 22, 2012)

Yedra said:


> According to me it isn't.
> So the MBTI says the tertiary is not influential and we're supposed to just accept it or what?


The dominant and auxiliary are conscious. The tertiary and inferior are subconscious. It terms of influence it goes Dominant>Inferior>Auxiliary>Tertiary. The inferior subconsciously drives the user, conflicts with and maybe unhealthily controls the dominant function often. The auxiliary, which is the dominant's bitch, has the subconscious tertiary to subconsciously drive it and to conflict with. 

You can form your own beliefs on the functions, but it's a pseudo-science or a "soft science" as I've been corrected, so unless you have a valid experiment or study done, you really can't prove your side or disprove the other. 

If you're not happy with the MBTI system (I don't blame you), check out socionics. Links: Socionics - the16types.info - Home
Wikisocion - Socionics Wiki - ????????? ????

It deals with personality typing the same way MBTI does (how one perceives information) but is far more complicated and you may find it very interesting.


----------



## Yedra (Jul 28, 2012)

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> The dominant and auxiliary are conscious. The tertiary and inferior are subconscious. It terms of influence it goes Dominant>Inferior>Auxiliary>Tertiary. The inferior subconsciously drives the user, conflicts with and maybe unhealthily controls the dominant function often. The auxiliary, which is the dominant's bitch, has the subconscious tertiary to subconsciously drive it and to conflict with.
> 
> You can form your own beliefs on the functions, but it's a pseudo-science or a "soft science" as I've been corrected, so unless you have a valid experiment or study done, you really can't prove your side or disprove the other.
> 
> ...


I am acquainted with Socionics.


----------



## sahana (May 13, 2013)

nice sharing.


----------



## Cross (Sep 9, 2012)

Ni, being a perceiving function focuses on collecting information and judgement, evaluation, reasons, cause and effect, ideas etc. particularly from the external world (or so it goes for Ni Doms). Perhaps introverted intuitives may be listeners and observers.

Ti, as a judging function focuses on processing information collected from the external world through perceiving functions. It does so with logical and systematic reasoning, but it does not necessitate alignment with external reasoning and validation. I think it might point a little towards theoretical reasoning and sometimes a little on reasoning through unconventional means such as the inclusion of magic, unforseen events, paranormal stuff, etc. I don't know for sure, since I'm not a Ti dom, but I've read it in another source (these aren't my own ideas). I've observed it in some Ti doms I know as well.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Well, the way the functions work in cognition really depends on what function is leading. Ni is kind of like seeking the essence or the core of things. I have increasingly come to realize I actually probably favor Ni over Ne (and I definitely had Ni perception as a teenager as I have vivid memories of certain life episodes that were Ni-focused), at least so it seems as of late, and as such my understanding of Ni has greatly deepened as well. In retrospect I also realize that much of my cognition, especially the way I understand and process information, is Ni-based.

I wrote this for the socionics ILI (INTp, Ni-Te type) and how Ni operates in socionics in terms of cognition, and I would say most of this holds true in an MBTI/Jungian sense as well:



> *ILIs operate with Ni base, making them naturally attuned to detecting hidden trends, meanings and patterns in the world around them. With intuition being introverted, the ILI is capable of reviewing long-term patterns from the past and making predictions into the present and future. This is because Ni operates similarly to Si, in that Ni needs to build models of the world by reviewing data over longer time periods. This differs to Ne base found in ILEs and IEEs who are attuned to possibilities in the present.
> **
> Introverted intuition could be best described as finding purpose and meaning beyond what can be immediately experienced that links to greater universal but fundamental truths of how the world functions. Someone with base Ni would for instance look at a clock but what they see and experience is not the clock itself but how the clock is representative of the concept of time. Further examination of the clock and the concept of time could lead to the search for greater and deeper universal truths such as how time controls the concepts of life and death and the apparent cyclical nature of the universe itself.
> 
> ...


Now, the way Ti operates is that it creates internal logical axioms of true-false, correct-incorrect and so on. Socionics as a typology system is a very good example of Ti as the entire system is mostly crafted by NeTi types. For example, a very banal version of Ti would be that after red there must be black, if we're say, creating a specific color scheme, and this pattern must be repeated consistently. If the pattern is not consistent it's not logically correct internally and there is a flaw in the system. 

There's also the part where Ni (especially in socionics with Te) is deductive and Ti (especially with Ne) is inductive. This has to do with how Viktor Gulenko understands the various cognitive styles associated with each type:



> Evolution–Involution DichotomyIn its most general form, I understand this dichotomy as Process–Result; or by its other informal name, Right–Left. More precisely, I refer to the designated Latin words 'evolutio': "developing outward" and 'involutio': "coalescing inward."
> Intellectual LevelDescribing Evolution–Involution at this level will initially contrast deductive vs. inductive thinking. Unfortunately, the bulk of literature on this cognitive dichotomy treats it in at least two different senses. In the first sense, deduction is understood simply as a strict formal sequence or expository progression of thought (aka Socionics rationality), while induction is understood as conclusions stemming from practical experience (aka Socionics irrationality).
> I will frame this dichotomy in the second sense, namely as simplification vs. complication of thought structure. Meaning that in deductive thinking, given a set of simple and obvious statements (axioms, postulates), the resultant consequences can be necessarily derived (theorem). Reasoning flows in the direction of simple to complex. Evolutionary types therefore mentally complicate the situation.
> In inductive thinking reasoning proceeds the other way around. Observing and comprehending complex phenomena, inductive thinking reduces them to generalized diagrams and models stripped of details. Involutionary types break down and simplify the situation in order to understand it. Reasoning flows in reverse order from complex to simple.
> ...


Gulenko Cognitive Styles - Wikisocion


----------



## The Dude (May 20, 2010)

Bump...

Ni: If I could use one word for Ni it would be foresight. It's a perception function that looks for patterns from a big picture perspective. It's seeing what will be. As a dominant function if feels almost unconscious because of unconscious inferior Se. 


Ti: If I could use one word for Ti it would be accuracy. It's a judging function that analyzes information in its process to build a personal framework. As a dominant function it feels colder than it really is because of unconscious inferior Fe.


----------



## Mortyi (Mar 22, 2017)

Could someone maybe show an example of a situation or problem and how ti and ni would tackle or view this ?


----------



## VoodooDolls (Jul 30, 2013)

cognitive functions are not about being smart or using super powers
they are about ways of processing info and acting upon it 
introverted functions are defensive and stay
extroverted are offensive and move
there's no such greater insight, its all situational
it's simple


----------

