# Ni Clarification



## RK LK (Sep 19, 2013)

Octavian said:


> Collective human experience and inclination is stored within each individual as archetypes. The archetypes are the "psychic" equivalent to biological instinct, in that they are essentially inherited. Jung believed that in the same way that instinctual impulses are inherited (think biological evolution), archetypal "images" are passed down, human to human.
> 
> Notice that between cultures that had no way of contacting the other, or that existed during completely different time periods, had so many myths, religions, beliefs, and tendencies that all fell in line with each other, (despite variations.) The same mathematical and scientific laws were being discovered in different places and at different times without those individuals having access to each others work. That is the result of the archetypes. They do not store hard data, they do not record events.
> 
> ...


 Thank you so much for your reply. It is beginning to make more sense to me. I like the idea of biological instincts and agree that there are many 'coincidences' among cultures that appear to break the space-time continuum. It sounds like Ni is part of a natural evolution of ideas and Ni-dominants are the first to notice this. Hence the 'physic' stereotype. I feel like Ni is described too much like a judging function and your post makes it clear that is totally a perceiving one.

I'm still not so certain about the 'one from many and many from one' example. Don't NTPs and NFPs try to unify their ideas into a single paradigm as well? I know a lot of Ne users who are concerned with the 'Ultimate' or god or the search for Truth. How does that differ from a Ni-doms stand point?


----------



## RK LK (Sep 19, 2013)

AstralVagabond said:


> From what I understand, Ni is all about gaining a realistic understanding of a given system/situation, acutely defining all the variables in the system as they really are and understanding how those variables work together to form and move the greater system - a narrowing, realistic and problem-solving function, while Ne is an open-ended, imaginative and creative function - which is based largely in unconscious processes. And the reason for which Ni-dominants can so accurately predict the future, the behaviour of an individual or something such, is this ability to holistically understand the greater system - such as the situation at hand or a person's mind - and how it can work forward.
> 
> However, what I find curious is that I've heard of actual, psychic premonitions - clairvoyant dreams, for instance - being tied with dominant Ni users that turn out to predict future events with an uncanny degree of accuracy. It makes me wonder if Intoverted Intuition is really just such a powerful function that the predictions it makes can be supposed to be supernatural (or at least preternatural) - or if there's something about it all that isn't purely naturalistic.


 The way you describe Ni sounds more like Ti to me, where you're consciously judging information and putting it in its proper place in a giant framework.  I'm 'pretty' sure it's something that comes without any active involvement.

My INFJ mother has premonitions from her dreams that usually come true, which I find kind of bizarre but awesome at the same time.


----------



## RK LK (Sep 19, 2013)

Robert2928 said:


> I may not be a Ni-dom but I have a pretty good understanding of the function.
> 
> 1.) While Ni is capable of predicting the future, Ni is moreso about seeing how everything is connected. Ni looks for underlying symbols and meanings to connect things together. What do the Social Network and the Amazing Spider-man have in common? On the surface these two films don't appear to have anything in common. Two different movies in different genres and with different demographics. However both films have Andrew Garfield in them. This example, while a bit of an over simplification, is how Ni works. Ni seeks out underlying patterns between two seemingly unrelated items and finds a connection between the two items.
> 
> ...


 The comparisons between Ne and Ni still seem really similar to me, but I can kind of see a difference. Is it that Ni simplifies and Ne multiplies? I was thinking Ni would have a less variety of interests because of this simplification process.  Since Ni is a perceiving function, isn't it a more passive than actively building a framework to predict future events (which sounds more like Ti to me)?


----------



## Octavian (Nov 24, 2013)

@RK LK



> I'm still not so certain about the 'one from many and many from one' example. Don't NTPs and NFPs try to unify their ideas into a single paradigm as well?


Ne would maintain the sanctity of the relationships between all 'things,' allowing everything to perceptually coexist. It isn't converging them into a single paradigm, it's creating a perceptual "framework" that is able to hold everything, which is why it is so often associated with webs.

Ni would reconcile the incompatible to find equilibrium between contrasting paradigms. (It is choosing and exclusionary.) It creates a convergence that is composed of, yet transcendent of the previous - resulting in "odd / magical thinking" that is really just perceptual reinterpretation, and in some cases, transformation - which is what I was alluding to.



> I know a lot of Ne users who are concerned with the 'Ultimate' or god or the search for Truth. How does that differ from a Ni-doms stand point?


Ni is most concerned with interpretation rather than objectively perceiving "intuitive" relationships, as is the case with Ne. Ni by comparison, is decidedly agnostic when it comes to such things. There is no ultimate *perceptual* truth, or way of viewing things, as the function tends to orient by tapping alternative interpretations to generate a single intuitive insight that is _relevant to that specific *context.*_ 



> p. 222: "...draws our attention to immediate sensory phenomena. ... It prompts an interest in perception itself--the process of recognizing and interpreting what we take in."
> 
> p. 223: "Introverted Intuition would prompt us to liberate our sense impressions from their larger context, thereby creating new options for perception itself."
> 
> ...


I do not think that there is an ultimate truth to Ni. If you're observing something like that in xNxJ it's probably a manifestation of Je and Ji activity forming conclusions.


----------



## Octavian (Nov 24, 2013)

> Thank you so much for your reply. It is beginning to make more sense to me. I like the idea of biological instincts and agree that there are many 'coincidences' among cultures that appear to break the space-time continuum. It sounds like Ni is part of a natural evolution of ideas and Ni-dominants are the first to notice this. Hence the 'physic' stereotype. I feel like Ni is described too much like a judging function and your post makes it clear that is totally a perceiving one.


Yeah. I don't think the predictive ability arises until the Je function (Te or Fe) comes into play.



> The comparisons between Ne and Ni still seem really similar to me, but I can kind of see a difference. Is it that Ni simplifies and Ne multiplies? I was thinking Ni would have a less variety of interests because of this simplification process. Since Ni is a perceiving function, isn't it a more passive than actively building a framework to predict future events (which sounds more like Ti to me)?


Essentially, Ne expands, Ni condenses. 

I don't think Ni necessarily has to have less interests, it's just that if dissonance arises between several ideas being held together, the function will not broaden the context to fully fit them, it will transform them into something that fits a specific context. That's when you get:

Ne: You're closed minded!

Ni: That shit is irrelevant.


----------



## Aleysia (Dec 31, 2012)

This thread has been fascinating!



Octavian said:


> Yeah. I don't think the predictive ability arises until the Je function (Te or Fe) comes into play.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Can you give a specific example of what the bolded part would look like? I know what Ne would do (or at least I think it's Ne, but maybe combined with Fi or Si), which is think of possibilities that could explain the apparent dissonance.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Aleysia said:


> This thread has been fascinating!
> 
> 
> 
> Can you give a specific example of what the bolded part would look like? I know what Ne would do (or at least I think it's Ne, but maybe combined with Fi or Si), which is think of possibilities that could explain the apparent dissonance.


These answers that I wrote to help out my gf with her studies exemplifies this well. Notice how I often reframe the questions or point of view into a new one before actually answering the question:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/133GtBGIWcTwuMFUCFJYfjfsOALdyGhJHQw2VLbNgIso/edit

I also like Viktor Gulenko's description of the DA cognitive style that INTJs possess along with ENFJs out of the Ni ego types:
http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index....tive_Styles#Dialectical-Algorithmic_Cognition

INFJs would be VS or vortical-synergetic with ENTJs:
http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.php?title=Gulenko_Cognitive_Styles#Vortical-Synergetic_Cognition

Anyway for DA, my thinking is almost disgustingly so at times. I love taking contradictions or opposites, mix and mash them to see how a new understanding can arise from it. Take one of my old sig taglines for example: Only while dreaming am I truly awake. 

Logically speaking, you can't be awake while dreaming because to dream means to be asleep, unless one is speaking about daydreaming, having future dreams etc. Through this kind of perspective-shifting by comparing and contrasting opposites new understanding arises.

Another very common example of this thinking is the saying "to love is to hate", or to think in the lines of that death gives rise to life and such like that. Pretty sure the lyricist of one of my favorite metal bands is an INTJ with lyric lines like these:

Nothing is, nothing becomes
End and beginning unites
Nothing was, nothing will be
Time and space collides

Its darkness brings light

The beginning, found within the end
Triumph bringing a sense of loss

Pinnacle of evolution, the end of linear time
*Progress or termination*
Cosmic ray mutation
*A dimensional shift, leap in consciousness
Or a dire destiny, asteroid fatality
*

For example etc.


----------



## Robert2928 (Apr 6, 2012)

@*RK LK *Well they are both intuition so I would hope they would sound similar lol 

I'll give this my best shot to explain this simply. You are correct that Ni simplifies and Ne multiples but let me clarify how. Ne multiples ideas by taking a previous existing idea (object in the external world aka outside the individual) and seeing multiple possibilities. One possible will lead to another possibility, which will lead to another possibility, etc. Think of a brainstorming session. I say something, then you bounce off of my idea to create something new, then I bounce off of you idea to create something new, etc. That is, essentially, how Extroverted Intuition (Ne) works. The intuition process is fixated on an object outside the individual hence Ne is an extroverted function. Make sense? 

While Ni does simplify it does not exactly have less variety. Imagine you could fly for a second (I know it sounds weird but trust me) As you ascend at first you would see your house, then you would see the group of houses that make your neighborhood, then you would see how neighborhoods create a city/town, then you would see how a group of cities/towns make a state, a group of states make a country, etc. This is, an extreme oversimplification, of essentially how Introverted Intuition (Ni) works. Ni sees how all the "little" items are connected to one another and ascends to understand the "big picture." To say that Ni would have less "variety" because it simplifies isn't really correct. Why? Both have "variety" albeit in different ways. You can see how Ne multiples because it's an extroverted function however you cannot see how Ni simplifies because it is introverted function. Does that make sense? 

@*Expy* You pretty much hit the nail on the head in my opinion.

Introverted Sensing (Si) is usually oversimplified as "stuff from the past, lives in the past, etc." I would say that is a misconception. Si is an introverted sensory experience. I tend to see people forget that Si is still a "sensory" experience. Se users experience sensory stimuli from while fixated on an object outside of themselves. During that moment they focus on that one object hence why we usually stereotype them as "good athletes" as they focus on the task/goal of the sport. Si on the other hand is stimulated by sensory data but the present data triggers a past sensory experience hence the Si have "good memory" stereotype? A Se user will eat a strawberry and focus on the current flavor(s) while an Si user will eat a strawberry which will trigger another time they experienced a similar flavor before. 

In my opinion, Contrary to what people usually believe from what I have seen, talking about the "past" =/= Si. Both Ni and Si are introverted functions so they are directed inward. Ni uses past events, connects them together with underlying patterns/ideas to predict potential outcomes in the future. Si users have to experience a present sensory stimuli that triggers a memory of a previous similar sensory experience. Like you said similar yet emphasis on different things.

Well that's my $0.02 anyway


----------



## RK LK (Sep 19, 2013)

@Robert2928

Yea it's making more sense to me. Ni is seeing more 'abstract' connections or intuitions, (digging into the collective unconscious?). Would you say that Ni appears simplified only in an external sense? 

Thanks for the help. Sometimes I think I understand it but other times I don't.


----------



## Robert2928 (Apr 6, 2012)

@*RK LK *That's an accurate statement. Kind of like athletes you know? You see them play their sport and think "I can do that! It doesn't look hard." not knowing the hours of physical/mental training athletes endure to perform at the competitive level they do. From the outside Ni looks like simple "broad generalizations" but Ni is a systematic unconscious process. A process Ni users themselves don't fully understand to be honest. 

Don't feel bad man Ni is one of the more complex cognitive functions to understand...even more so if you are not a Ni user yourself. Everything makes sense in my head regarding Ni however it's difficult to translate it to someone who doesn't experience it first hand (hence why Ni users have a reputation of using metaphors when speaking) To put it simple, You see colors everyday right? It's easy to explain a color to someone who has seen it before. Now imagine trying to explain color...to someone who was born blind. Yeah explaining Ni to someone who doesn't use is similar to that lol


----------



## umop 3pisdn (Apr 4, 2014)

Having visions or a confident 'gut feeling' about future outcomes is just a resultant phenomenon, it's not really the core of what Ni is about. It's more about perspective in regards to abstract/conceptual perception (in other words, 'subjective intuition'), generally as a dominant attitude it is only concerned with the problem of perception itself. Ne as 'objective intuition' instead sees intuition as a way of engaging with and perceptually organizing the environment. Ni is notorious for altering its vantage point to solve problems by apparently doing nothing but changing how the problem is viewed, which is an attitude characteristic of a kind of 'agnosticism' of the intuitive/abstract content of the environment, and Ne users tend to find this tendency pretty unsettling. This process of altering one's subjective vantage point becomes so automatic that Ni users will do this without realizing it, and only notice the particular result of this activity (sometimes experienced as a kind of sudden 'realization'). Since subjective or introverted functions are characteristically self-referential, you develop a sense of when a particular perspective is fitting or not by this process of self-reference. I think this is what extends to 'predicting' the future (arbitrarily selecting a particular pattern among many patterns [perspective], and extending it to its natural conclusion [what will/may be]). As for having fewer interests, again I think it's just a similar process, where Ni seems more concerned with the subject of 'meaning' (internally derived) than Ne is, it kind of has to ignore the intuitive content of the environment (which is sometimes expressed as a kind of 'potentiality' or promise), I think this sort of thing is bound to result in a more singular or ruthless vantage point.


----------



## Octavian (Nov 24, 2013)

Some cool stuff:



> “Most types rely on Introverted Intuition to contend with ambiguities of meaning and perception—that is, to see that a situation can be interpreted in more than one way. We may use it, for example, to acknowledge the possibility of both scientific and religious positions on life after death, or to deal with incompatible experiences of self and solidarity at work, at home, and among friends” (225).
> 
> “It may seem peculiar, therefore, to depend on this function for one’s primary understanding of reality. If INJs are seeing things from many (sometimes conflicting) perspectives, on what basis would they ever take action?” (225).
> 
> ...


That reminds me of two things. 

1.) A conversation I had with @-Alpha-



> The way I visualize it is like us standing together in a bubble. The bubble representing the game. He laughs only to find that his bubble is inside my much larger bubble that represents a bigger game that he can't even begin to comprehend.
> 
> I once read a story about Bobby Fischer playing against [nondescript Russian chess player] who had been studying Fischer's strategies and habits. Fischer walked into the hall the minute he was to be disqualified, made a scene, complained about lighting and basically through a fit. After losing game 1, he switched his strategy, making random moves in ridiculous ways and won. I don't remember the exact story, but I read it recognizing that he understood that they were playing a game outside of his game and he sought to impose one larger and more complex.


2.) My favorite historical figure: Augustus Caesar (originally known as Octavian.) 


* *






Augustus Caesar - INTJ, 

During the Battle of Actium he was still known as Octavian. Prior to this battle, Mark Antony had been married to Octavian's wife, Octavia Minor. Political marriages were extremely common and provided strategic positioning that would otherwise be impossible to obtain. Mark Antony abandoned Octavia Minor and moved to Egypt to settle down with Cleopatra, greatly pissing off Octavian while simultaneously creating a full blown political scandal.

1. Cleopatra and Julius Caesar were known to have had sexual relations. A boy named Caesarion appeared sometime later and was said to resemble Julius and even possess some of his mannerisms. Cleopatra asserted that he was the son of Julius.

2. Cleopatra was thought to have been interested in seizing Rome, or at the very least, having Egypt surpass it. Probably one of the few cases of propaganda floating around that wasn't too far from the truth.

3. Mark Antony was a part of something called the Second Triumvirate which was essentially a political alliance that destroyed some of the more powerful orchestrators of Julius Caesar's death, while also regaining and strengthening important territory. Octavian and Antony both gained significant territory as a result of these military campaigns, and became some of the more powerful individuals in Rome.

The above is significant because when Antony went to Egypt he tried to keep control over his legions and territories back in Rome, while also attempting to get Caesarion acknowledged as heir to Julius Caesar. Julius named Octavian as his successor in his will, and never made any mention to Caesarion. So when Antony and Cleopatra officially elevated Caesarion to power, Octavian launched a propaganda war declaring Antony an enemy of the state under the pretense of planning to conquer Rome through the 13 year old proxy - Caesarion. 

Sometime later Octavian and Antony went to war. 

I wont go into too much detail regarding that but Octavian was clearly the superior strategist and had a very elite general on his side called Agrippa that won several key battles early on for him. Many of Antony's men defected, one of them in particular giving Octavian his battle plans, and Antony was effectively crushed. 

Things got really interesting after that. Octavian had Caesarion killed stating something along the lines of "Rome has no need for two Caesars." A very interesting statement. Especially when we consider that Octavian idolized his uncle, immediately began campaigning in hostile territory when he found out that Julius had named him his heir, engaged in an overwhelming amount of social and political manipulation to gain power, and waged war over and over again to secure his positioning. 

3 or 4 years later he attempted to resign all of is powers before the Senate. The man that saw no need for two Caesars was now attempting to revert back to a quiet, civilian life? Very clearly calculated and it resulted in the outcome that Octavian, by that time called Augustus, wanted. The senate not only rejected his resignation, they assigned him even more power to lock him into that position. Octavian possessed an abnormal amount of power and influence given the senate's fear of dictatorship / concentration of power. Had he left, the large gap would have resulted in a crazed power struggle (indeed Roman politics tended to follow a pattern of bickering -> kill everyone.) The senate was right to not risk that, and Octavian was brilliant for exploiting that.


----------



## Octavian (Nov 24, 2013)

*Lenore Thomson - Introverted Intuition:*



> “The issue here is the framework of beliefs an expectations that we maintain. Some are dictated by society; others are a matter of subjective experience—our gender, our name, our history, our vocation, our background. Knowledge is facilitated, limited, and directed by boundary conditions” (228).
> 
> “INJs have an unusual awareness of how such conditions determine our conceptual vocabulary, and their Intuition leads them to discern aspects of reality that aren’t being acknowledged. Thus, many INJs choose professions that allow them to work with questions of language and terminology—as editors and proofreaders, for example, but also as mathematicians, psychologists, theologians, poets, and programmers. Any field that involves conceptual signs and categories is likely to interest these types” (228).
> 
> ...




*INTJ Description:*



> “Although both INTJs and ENTJs realize their Intuitions by way of rational criteria – principles, law, organizational structure, and so forth – ENTJs will not usually pursue a goal unless it strikes them as compatible with reason. INTJs are more classicaly Promethean. They will steal fire from the gods without any assurance that a reasonable hearth exists at which to tend it back home. For such types, knowledge is not information, but a way of looking at things” (240)





> "Such types may expend a great deal of time attempting to winnow the actual logic of accepted theories and formulations from expedient or merely limited assumptions. INTJs are accordingly drawn to science, mathematics, and medicine – fields in which new ideas about reality are constantly being forged and tested logically. They may also take interest in psychology, theology, publishing, and linguistics. As they pursue their intuitions, they inevitably combine elements from varied fields, perceiving an underlying commonality of form or meaning” (240)





> “This sense of underlying structure and meaning leads INTJs to value both elegance of form and subtlety of expression. Nothing exists that can’t bear reediting and paring down to its essential components. The connections INTJs perceive among very different areas of knowledge may be sufficient to convince them they’re headed in the right direction, even when they can’t explain what they’re after” (241)





> Where technical and intellectual competence are concerned, INTJs have a kind of inner compass, and they prefer a situation in which they don’t have to coordinate their work with or report to someone else.” (241)





> Moreover, their need to find an alternate point of view in order to understand something can sound like disagreement or negativity – as though the speaker’s ideas had been judged and found wanting. Thus, even people who know an INTJ well may believe the person is either indifferent to them or critical of them” (242).





> “Many such types become articulate quite early, and they use their verbal abilities to fend off involvement in anything they don’t understand or don’t wish to. However, their awareness of others’ feelings does not keep pace with their verbal abilities. Young INTJs may be intellectually precocious but emotionally immature, exercising their dominant function by distancing themselves from others, engaging in ironic comments and somewhat juvenile sarcasm. Sometimes, to their surprise, their observations make people laugh and afford them the group approval they were attempting to preempt. INTJs rather enjoy the paradox this sets up and will play to it – experimenting with the boundaries of humor itself.” (243)





> "[INTJs regard] most events as arbitrary arrangements of elements, to be dismantled and reassembled at will"




*INFJ Description:*



> “Because INFJs use Fe to relate to the outer would, they may seem more outgoing than they really are. Their personal approach and ability to find common ground with others combines with their intuitive need for innovation and alternative views, and they frequently find themselves in positions of authority. They may not seek leadership, but they are often elected by others to serve on boards and committees. People appreciate their ability to listen and to consider group feelings and values” (246)





> “Thus, it should be recognized that INFJs and more like INTJs than they initially appear. Their primary relationship is to their inner world, and they are receptive to others only up to a point. *Indeed, these types often find that their sympathy and perceptive listening have been mistaken for an overture of friendship, which they didn't intend*” (246)


Made me laugh my ass off. I often find others referring to me as their friend and I'm like "since when."



> “Unlike INTJs however, their sense of the unexpressed is not impersonal and casual; it is intensely personal and oriented by emotional awareness. Their intuition takes them into psychological areas that other types are likely to keep at bay. Because they don't usually know right away the import of what they're intuiting, they may ‘go along’ with a questionable situation until they can get a hold of how they actually feel about it. This tendency can be confusing to others, and it is often misinterpreted as reckless experimentation” (246).





> “Like INTJs, INFJs have a penchant for abstraction and symbolic representation. If interested, they excel in the fields of science, math and medicine. However, they are not generally motivated by sheer intellectual challenge. INFJs require a sense of meaning in the work they do. They are more likely than INTJs to personalize their skills - as teachers, psychologists, consultants, ministers and family doctors. They are particularly sensitive to others' feelings of exclusion, and they may address or try to rectify inequities of status or opportunity within the context of their profession” (246)





> “Such types can be quite tenacious in pointing out the discrepancies between stated beliefs and actual behavior. This is the arena in which their intuition is most evident. INFJs wrestle all their lives with the conflict they perceive maintaining harmonious relationships and expressing emotional truth, and it is a central issue in the books, novels, plays, and psychological articles that INFJs write. Their 1 percent representation in the population belies the tremendous influence these types have in shaping cultural ideas about identity and being true to oneself” (247)





> “INFJs frequently express themselves indirectly, depending on unstated implications to carry their meaning, and they can be put off by too direct a reference to something that is of great value to them” (247).





> “INFJs are a bit like Merlin, summoned by the voice of Nimue deep with the enchanted forest. The song they hear is calling them elsewhere, beyond the cultivated borders of common consensus. When they are able to use their Extroverted Feeling function well, they bring that song back into the public domain, find a way to integrate it into the fabric of the community. INFJs who don't do this can get trapped, like the great wizard of Camelot, in a kind of enchantment that robs them of their very genuine powers of discernment and insight” (250).



* *




I think this should be stated: A legitimate INTJ or INFJ would not identify as a Thinker or Feeler. They would identify as an Intuitive. The Je function just creates a sort of gravitational pull towards different types of systems, that they need not even obey. 

Too many INTJs and INFJs walk around letting their Je define and entrench them.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

I was reminded of this video that's a great example of how Ni manifests in ENTJs:


----------



## Sixty Nein (Feb 13, 2011)

Octavian said:


> * *
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'm inclined to believe that those types aren't actually Ni dominants. Just a thought.


----------



## -Alpha- (Dec 30, 2013)

Sixty Nein said:


> I'm inclined to believe that those types aren't actually Ni dominants. Just a thought.


I'm not so sure. Just thinking aloud here, but occasionally concepts can become very real and the concept of an ingenious logician isn't necessarily the worst persona to want to embody. Occasionally after reading a book or watching a TV series I lose track of what is the book and what is myself. I'd imagine a few honest-to-goodness Ni doms get caught up in the concept stereotypes lay out for them.

Actually, thinking back I'm not entirely certain I have a solid concept of what is 'myself' sometimes, so grain of salt here. I'm told I throw things out occasionally that may or may not be related.


----------



## reckful (Jun 19, 2012)

Sixty Nein said:


> I'm inclined to believe that those types aren't actually Ni dominants. Just a thought.


From a Jungian perspective, and as further explained here, I'd say you're almost certainly correct. The descriptions of "rational types" (J-doms) and "irrational types" (P-doms) in Psychological Types pretty strongly suggest that, when Jung was dealing with someone he thought was a P-dom, he was generally dealing with someone who'd test P on the MBTI — whether they were extraverted _or_ introverted. So the people Jung pegged as Ni-doms were more likely to have been MBTI IN_Ps than MBTI IN_Js.


----------

