# Describe your dominant function



## Cocachin (Jan 19, 2013)

@Watch Key Phone 's description is pretty spot on.

Another factor is having a sort of pre-conscious grab on whether something is logically coherent or not. I'll often see or hear a statement and go "waaaait a moment, that's nonsense!" or "yep, that makes sense (meaning it's a neatly closed system)" a splitsecond or so before I actually know why. And while I have never been especially excelling at math, I seem to have a neck for the "x is to y as X is to Y" and "If all mice speak French and no trees are mice, does that mean that no trees speak French?" kind of puzzles.

The urge for coherence can also lead to those annoying "well, actually ..." statements (*pushes glasses up the nose*) that are not meant to show off knowledge but are born out of a need to set things right. It's like a false or incomplete or oversimplified statement is a stain on the crisp white shirt of the cosmos.



Ne is constantly feeding in new possible connections that are then checked for coherence. And, yes, I do think that it can lead to a form of constant worrying about everything that COULD go wrong ... as well as a childlike playfulness that keeps imagining weird connections and scenarios.


----------



## Chaosmosism (May 15, 2013)

Beauty for Ashes' description of Ne is excellent (aka not mixed with Ti or other). 


Ne is what allows me to see how people reach certain conclusions and why they think a certain way, how any position is relative to so many factors that none can be held as entirely true or entirely wrong, it only depends front which point of view, or basis it constructs itself, and thus engages metaphysics.

Ne makes me extremly optimistic/confident, not because I think everything will go right, but because I know I can relativise, or see the good side, or the opportunities that lies in any (personal) situation. 

It is also what makes me quite unconfortable in situations where I have to shut it down: I feel deprived of myself in structured environments. I'm not a very extroverted ENTP, and not of those enjoying the social game/act. Acting and representation is utterly boring to me in the same way than writting an essay is boring: what interest me in understanding, once i'm done with that, I can't bother structuring it on the paper - without even talking about the drain that transforming my understanding into linear explainations is. I always manage, but I really dislike it, and prefer talking to writing as talking is more maleable and fluide.
And regarding the social game: I know how it works, I know what I would get from playing along, but I'd rather focus my energy on something that brings something new, and in relationships, novelty can only be found when interacting in a true, unmasked way.

The idea of settling down in any way (work, country, relationships, and even identity) makes me anxious, if not nauseous. 

Ne makes me strive for meaninful new experiences, and is what leads me to put myself in dangerous, if not potentialy deadly situations, as I find the way my mind react to them fascinating. 

This is usualy how I try to visualy depict Ne: Imagine an immense, neverending web, with sub-webs and sub sub webs etc. That could be the universe with invisible connections between each planet, each solar system etc. This is how all the information is stocked.
Now imagine you can travel through this web, make it spin, this is what happens when I think about a particular subject: I will start from a specific dot, and consider all it's connection, and compare the sub way in which it is included to compare it to other equivalent subwebs. My intellectual goal is usualy to find the root of the subweb or, in case of contradicting opinions, pin point exactly where the previous system creates two subsystems, that would be NeTi.

Subjects or ideas that really bore me (to death) are the ones that doesnt have any major importance in that web, like a minor end branch that is very far from one of the centers/ or the center of the entire system.

I have noticed how, during a conversation, I can use facts, and data I had no idea I had, and that I don't remember learning about. 
I think Ne gathers data both conciously (need) and unconsciouly (automatism), depending on your initial level of interest. This lead to a quite impressive long term memory whose data are instanteously accessed when needed. On the otherside, I have a ridiculously inefficient short term memory, caused by my lack of attention. (But these could also be Si/lack of Se)

Lack of stimulation for Ne drains me from my energy and enthusiasm, which leads to loss of self confidence, sense of purpose of life, and potential depression. It happens that my Ne is extremely demanding: Two years in the same COUNTRY is too much for me...


----------



## EyesOpen (Apr 3, 2013)

Phoenix_Rebirth said:


> 1. Ni is the attitude that whatever is expressed is just a tiny little fraction of its entire reality
> 
> 2. You have to look beyond the facts and details that your Se collects and deduce the underlying meaning behind the object; what's in the behind of scenes.
> 
> ...



Huh, very interesting...I didn't really know this! I have written in grad school essays or job qualification essays almost exactly this..."I have a keen ability to see the reality behind what is presented on the surface, I understand that what is presented is not all there is to a person" (because I work in a people-oriented field in health rehabilitation, but this would apply to objects, situations, etc.). Before I knew anything about cognitive functions so I find this quite fascinating to see you state!


----------



## The Madman (Feb 20, 2013)

Phoenix_Rebirth said:


> 8. Ni is in tune with the things that aren't expressible, along with what your senses can't perceive, and with its hidden dynamics - to put those things down to words is incredibly hard and it will parody reality.


This.
I tried to write about my Ni for about 15 minutes, but I could not get my ideas down in words. 
If you find yourself in a situation where you have a brilliant vision in your mind, one which pounds and bulges and begs to be released into the outer world, tearing and driving you crazy, and when you go to release it - apathy strikes you, and the emotions die, and you wish to keep the idea in your mind, then you are in an Ni-Se complex, with Ni being dominant.


----------



## Doc Dangerstein (Mar 8, 2013)

OMG WTF BRO said:


> Growing up, l had A LOT of anxiety and would verabalize it more than l do but when people said "You worry too much" it was like l didn't understand what they meant at all. l saw worrying as my actual mental framework...''too much'', l just couldn't get.
> 
> So yeah. l think inferior Si shows in tons of ways in my personality l didn't understand. Maybe with Ne, it leads to the outlandish scenarios l was afraid of.
> 
> since no type really catches a break from having Ne or Ni just a few functions away, l guess it could manifest in an unexpected way in anyone. l wonder if tert. or inferior Ni in xSTPs leads to the more unusual manifestations of paranoia and obsessive thoughts...which type has more unwanted issues with the Ni, l mean.


Si is the dominant function of our unconscious. Often, when I'm in a bitter mood I remember every negative moment of my life, crave vengeance on the people who hurt me and imagine the wonderfully explicit ways to execute those desires. Whenever I hear someone talk of wanting to punch someone out, or to shoot them, my initial thought is not of disgust but of amazement. How is it possible that people have no imagination. I could make it so poetic, or at least get them on national news. Otherwise it's daydreams and visions of the beach-side where I spend my teenage years, how to make it happen again and how to make it better. 

I do believe that our types are more susceptible to experiencing trauma; especially in the grip.

Ne, how chaosmosism talks about is bloody awesome. Intuition is just weird; there's little difference between introverted and extroverted intuition. It's only noticeable in people who have it as their inferior, perhaps their tertiary. Many Ne doms will try explain it away as a combination of other functions or through a shadow episode, or whatever. Intuition is a subliminal function responsible for free association, recognition of new patterns, understanding of context, possibility, time perception, interconnectivity. Intuition is intuition regardless of orientation. Ni is deterministic; Ne is probabilistic.

I'll think about the Ne/anxiety relationship; I have a hunch which I'm just too sleepy to put into words. Maybe tomorrow.


----------



## Chaosmosism (May 15, 2013)

Yes, I think it is quite difficult to explain (in a personal way) Ne as independant from the other functions. 
Ne is perceptive, and is unconcious, it stares at the world and want to be presented with as much new inputs as possible (it's its fuel for free association, pattern recognition etc) and thus, on it's own, it doesnt exactly "do" anything IN the world, it just links in it's own way the inputs and the subconscious. What it creates in a person though, it a starving for inputs (and so make the person act in order to feed it), but not necesseraly ANY inputs, as the other functions may give a preference for certain "themes" and systems. 
Ne brings solutions effortlessly and without any concious effort: once you have been presented with enough data, the solution pops up in your mind, sometimes about things you had not even decided to elucidate. It's in those moments only that Ne is really graspable, because when you consciously analyse smg, or when you then want to explain what Ne has "given" you, you start using NeTi, or only Ti taking into consideration Ne in a retrospective way.


Regarding the difference between Ne/Ni, in function test, I get an extremely hight Ne, and a quite hight Ni. What to do with that, I'm not really sure. I could be explained by life events and the developpement of shadow functions through repetitive uses in periodes of stress. I do have trouble differenciating them, but maybe my supposed Ni is just NeTi .Anyway, the thing is to me, being probabilistic is indirectly being deterministic: 

We started a discution in an other thread about relativist and universal philosophies (the first being more Ne, the second Ni). But to me it all comes to this difference: Ni may focus on the subject(s), while Ne focus on systems about the subject(s). Ni focus on the nature of things, while Ne on the nature of the system that links things together. But if you take a broader perspective, determining the nature of the systems IS determining the nature of things that are subsumed to it. 
So taking this into consideration, one way of differenciating Ne/Ni is less the way they work than the philosophical outlook they have on the world and what they focus on: both can lead to determined philosophical frameworks (which can be unconsious; it may be the use of T/F that systematise it consciously) through which they interpret things; but Ni may focus on one or several sub-systems, be more focused, while Ne will confront system together. This confrontation of system leads to relativism. 

I could go on but I sense it's starting to get messy. To adress such a broad subject, I would need to write an essay (which I won't, as this essay, to be complete, would have to turn into a book, and there is no way my Ne will let me do that  )

About Ne/ anxiety, please do put it into words once rested  

It took me quite a while to realise I was an nervous/anxious person. i feel myself as being constently relaxed and laid-back, and it is how I appear to the world. I attribute this blind spot to lack of Fi: It can take me several days before I realise something is wrong in me. Anyway, how is it connected to Ne? 
What I can say is that what makes me feel anxious is obligations, wether they come from the outside or from the inside: 
from the outside: obligations: to HAVE TO do something, even the easiest one, makes we want to avoid it and causes me stress.
from the inside: I have this idea that I find so great I want to realise it: this is a really big project, but when I look at all the responsabilities such a project will bring me in the futur, and how it will tie me to a very specific set of activities, it makes me want to abandon it, which would be quite easy as I don't take any pleasure in putting the ideas into practice.

When I see that people are expecting something out of me I tend to fly away, and desappeare, in very rude way, without notice: You just won't hear from me anymore, or maybe months later. If I can't vanish in thin air simply because we live in the same place, or because you are family and such, I'll just turn very elusive. I know it hurts some people and I wish it didnt, but the knowing of me having a responsability makes it even worst: I won't call you back because I know that not calling you back will hurt you, not at all because i want you to suffer, but because I want you not to. This is massively irrational and I try to work on that, but that's my instinctive reaction.


----------



## awanderingdreamer (May 12, 2013)

I would discuss my Fi, but I FEEL like I would be EXPOSING myself overly much. ^,^


----------



## Chaosmosism (May 15, 2013)

awanderingdreamer said:


> I would discuss my Fi, but I FEEL like I would be EXPOSING myself overly much. ^,^


I have noticed I'm so counter-productive with INFPs: I want them to open-up and share who they are, but I scare them away with all my questions  :crazy:


----------



## Doc Dangerstein (Mar 8, 2013)

Ne is something that needs constant stimulation; continuing on the spoiled prince metaphor if our little charming creature sits around the house, at work and does whatever with nothing to pique his interest then he will hibernate Comatose. I imagine this to be true for both extroverted perception functions; you need to become one with the external world to be fully alive. As with sensing you have a choice as to where you concentrate your perceptions. Don't feed Ne, it will look to generate ideas from your thoughts, your environment, emotions and the thoughts, behaviours and emotions of others. 

Dwell on something negative, a past memory, the words of a worried friend or parent and you'll multiply both the quantity and the intensity of these thoughts and emotions because you are cerebrally quick to conceive infinite possibilities Have I got you worried yet? There is a choice involved with relation to focus, content, and flow of your intuitions. You have an option to throw Ne at something and it will conceive possibilities, patterns, ideas or the ridiculous and the absurd. 

You can't always control the content, as all intuition is subliminal, but you can control the environment. The more possibilities you give Ne, the more possibilities Ne will give you. Imagine a multiplication sign; give it anxiety, fear and all that lovely brooding and it will give you things to be afraid of, more anxiety and some really cool things to brood about.

Ne is the generation of this incoherent pseudo-intellectual babble masquerading as a theory that's perfectly sound and logical in my own mind. I thought as to what I wanted to say over the course of the day, reduced it to one or two sentences Yet, I forgot them both once I sat down at the computer to write. I lied, I sat down at the computer with the intention to write but ended up chatting to a friend on facebook, watching some anime and wrote so much more then I originally planned. Perceivers can plan, and plan well we do. It's obedience we have a problem with.


And, I did come to the conclusion that lawns are boring; spraying, and mowing them is like vacuuming the carpet. Dandelions are pretty; and they are quite lethal. I'm still undecided as to whether they are partisans fighting for their right to live or the botanist equivalent of a fascist regime existing strictly to reign havoc on home owners and dominate what we know as plant life. I like not being responsible for lawn care. Yeah, Ne -- all this to tell you it's the multiplication button on a calculator.


----------



## Cross (Sep 9, 2012)

It is so random and distorted, so odd and beyond ordinary, so flightly and ungrounded... it so me... and sometimes I think it's even beyond me. I love it just the way it is.

Ni dwells in imagination as Ne does. The only difference is whereas other Extroverted Intuitives may not settle for objects and details, Ni won't settle for either objects, details, and their possibilities. It goes inside and settles for possibilities of thoughts in the imagination. Ni may not always be helpful for real life situations, but when it works together with other balancing extroverted functions, it can be really useful.


----------



## Cross (Sep 9, 2012)

awanderingdreamer said:


> I would discuss my Fi, but I FEEL like I would be EXPOSING myself overly much. ^,^


At least when other Fi's discuss their reasoning it may be pretty logical despite it not being as logical to them. Sometimes others will accept it quite easily. Ni thinking can appear chaotic to other people. I do agree with you that it's best to conceal the best parts about introverted Functions. 

Superficial people can settle for superficial thoughts... sadly there are a lot of superficial happenings in socialization; though the fun part is the secrecy!


----------



## Scelerat (Oct 21, 2012)

Te:







Ni:


----------



## Chaosmosism (May 15, 2013)

Gettingacrossthebridge said:


> At least when other Fi's discuss their reasoning it may be pretty logical despite it not being as logical to them. Sometimes others will accept it quite easily. Ni thinking can appear chaotic to other people. I do agree with you that it's best to conceal the best parts about introverted Functions.
> 
> Superficial people can settle for superficial thoughts... sadly there are a lot of superficial happenings in socialization; though the fun part is the secrecy!


You were somewhat kidding in your message, but I'm gonna take it as serious:

I don't see how secrecy is the opposite of superficial. 
I can understand the difficulty of sharing, or the difficulty to share some very personal and intimate thoughts, but not sharing for the sake of secrecy, isnt is just immature (and that's an ENTP calling someone "immature", that's being shameless ) 
Of course it also may be that the people surrounding you may be superficial and not able to understand your deep internal life, but having the courage to face being misunderstood would allow you, maybe, to find like minded people. Once you do, you may relativise your secrecy.
And if you are so much better that them, you would do good to the world.
That could be a sarcasm, it"s not, if we want, as It's actualy a real shame that the best people usualy keep to themselves.
Of course that's somewhat an extraverted point of view (considering that you get enriched my the exterior). But as much as overly extroverted people should learn to rest inside themselves, I've seen introverted getting stuck over the years in their habit of secrecy, and once they want to share, they find themselves unable to, which is too bad, as it also means depriving yourself from an external point of view, which is good for sanity sometimes...


----------



## Cross (Sep 9, 2012)

Chaosmosism said:


> I don't see how secrecy is the opposite of superficial.
> I can understand the difficulty of sharing, or the difficulty to share some very personal and intimate thoughts, but not sharing for the sake of secrecy, isnt is just immature (and that's an ENTP calling someone "immature", that's being shameless )


I have read your entire message, and it seems directed to me. I won't conclude that just yet; but I hope you aren't saying that I'm keeping up secrecy for the sake of secrecy, because I am not, nor have I said that.

If I have to keep a lot of secrets, should I go about the pain of it? Can I not enjoy doing so? Furthermore, when I do enjoy keeping secrets, is secrecy the sake of secrecy? In my case it is not. I keep secrets for other reasons, and rather than go about the negativity of it, I choose to enjoy it. 

I can clarify that part about myself, though I noticed you chose to shed light on another aspect of it. For sanity's sake, keeping secrets keeps me grounded. Having to share so many things can really... crack me at my core. I don't need you to understand what that's like. I'm just telling you that I am more centered in that aspect. I've found like minded people, but even in finding them, I've realized that I'd rather keep to myself. Just because I find like minded individuals doesn't mean I'd be willing to share more with them. I found some in PerC and I've realized that I'd rather not talk to them directly. I'd rather listen to them. 

I have the courage to face being misunderstood. I don't even know if you understand me well enough from my post. But being misunderstood isn't really worth it. As for other people who are incapable of expressing themselves, I feel bad for them. I am not one of those people however. Many of my friends think I'm an extrovert the way I talk, hang out with them, and let loose at parties.

Extroverts are said to gain energy from action, while introverts do so through contemplation. Perhaps this is why we are different.

Anyway, thank you for the points you presented. I'd prefer to contemplate over them in private than to discuss them. If you have more ideas, please feel free to share them. I'd rather listen.


----------



## Chaosmosism (May 15, 2013)

Gettingacrossthebridge said:


> I have read your entire message, and it seems directed to me. I won't conclude that just yet; but I hope you aren't saying that I'm keeping up secrecy for the sake of secrecy, because I am not, nor have I said that.
> 
> If I have to keep a lot of secrets, should I go about the pain of it? Can I not enjoy doing so? Furthermore, when I do enjoy keeping secrets, is secrecy the sake of secrecy? In my case it is not. I keep secrets for other reasons, and rather than go about the negativity of it, I choose to enjoy it.
> 
> ...



Actualy, I wasnt trying to define you in any way. Just shared some improvised thoughts one your sentence "the fun part is the secrecy". It was a general open questioning, the way I would ask a friend if, for ex, it's perception of some matter isnt being selfish or (insert any adjective). It's not calling them selfish or anything; it's barely to (have them) analyse (or share) their thoughts on that idea which all of us, as detentors of a human mind, share to different extend different human tendancies. 

About the "being misunderstood isnt really worth it". It doesnt: I dont see the point in rejoicing in it, or aiming at it. I was thinking about the courage to be oneself (and from that, being potentialy misunderstood). it's just a side effect. You can act extroverted and open, while still hiding yourself.

I'm an ambivert actualy, and have been on the introverted side of the scale for some years, so I do understand were you are coming from. Though I guess, being ultimately Extroverted, I guess I may tend to regard "opening" has an improvement, that I should not generalise.

Last idea I could share about secrecy: It's not really possible to generalise as there are many sorts of secrecy. But let's take secrecy about some past event as a sample. (and I have to precise: I'm not talking about not talking about smg, but more precisely, considering smg AS a secret) to me it just seems like holding on on negative thoughts, and ultimately, giving them too much importance against your own sake. It's not about compulsively sharing everything, it's about having accepted it and living it as casualy as anything else.

My perception of personnal secrecy in general, whatever the type, is that it just reflect and leads to the building of one's own cage, wether it being the haunted house of the past, or the lack of attempt to actualy reflect the inside on the outside. But i guess it's not mandatory... 

Guess I should not expect an answer, as you would rather listen 

But I still want to ask you that question (sincere questioning here): in what way doest it crack you at your core?
I used to feel smg similar myself when I attempted to, for once, share very personnal feelings, that end up not being understood. It feels like a sacriledge of some sort, as if I had spoiled them. Are you refering to smg similar?


----------



## tangosthenes (Oct 29, 2011)

I'm not reading all of that, but here's my take.
Ti/Ne
I see the information. It sees me. It tries to run away. I pursue. Sometimes I can catch it, and I will lock it in its mental cage. Sometimes I don't catch it, and it runs away. It will be back. Damn you, you little bit of information, you'll be back. 

The information never wants to stay put. Sometimes it finds a way to break out of its cage, sometimes the prison guards help it escape.

That's what it is: I'm a statesman and general for Rome and I'm desperately trying to fund my army and keep my troops loyal, but its a losing battle. More defect than join up.


----------



## nonnaci (Sep 25, 2011)

Ti with Se/Ni: 

-Thinking in terms w.r.t. relations of causality/doing
-Defining relations on its own terms that are consistent with a manifold of relations
-Direct engagement with the concrete/abstract spheres, as opposed to just their organizations

In the concrete, this is often typified by a sensory (observation) to thinking (decision) feedback loop. I want X to be done, I'm interfacing/interacting with the system and make a probe and get Y observation. Where does Y stand in relation to X and how do I make the adjustment. Its quite an experiential process of literally engaging/playing around with a system, refining it, and directing it towards an ultimate outcome.

In the abstract, there's a similar method of engagement with ideas that may be established in a visual orientation, or by various reinterpretations of their "meanings". Often the meaning of an idea is revealed through its relations with others, which Ti attempts to create via synthetic judgments through its engagement with Ni percepts.


----------



## Cross (Sep 9, 2012)

Chaosmosism said:


> But I still want to ask you that question (sincere questioning here): in what way doest it crack you at your core?
> I used to feel smg similar myself when I attempted to, for once, share very personnal feelings, that end up not being understood. It feels like a sacriledge of some sort, as if I had spoiled them. Are you refering to smg similar?


What does SMG mean?


----------



## Quernus (Dec 8, 2011)

Fi-dom.... Ne aux.

It's difficult to express this in words. Fi is so internal for me, and so natural, it's like... saying to describe what it's like to perform the involuntary function of breathing.

I read or hear a question and I instantly pull inwards to make sense of it. What is really being asked, what are my emotional reactions to it, where should I go with it, how can I reconcile all these things so that they make sense with all potential outcomes? It's as if the question is part of some ongoing conversation that was already happening, and now I have to figure out where I want it to lead, and how to best cut into this "conversation" in order to get there. 

When I think about what it is like to use Fi, I immediately imagine myself walking around at work, or my apartment, and am flooded with the overall "feeling" or "vibe" of the inner-chatter and tension that I experience at pretty much all times. 

The tension is something that can be presumed to always exist, but it's unspoken even within myself. It's just there as constant backup, to bend or reciprocate or provide resistance against everything that might come my way. No one sees it, I don't think about it, but it informs every decision I make.

Uh. Basically, I walk around and I'm usually in my own little world but when I have to interact with what's going on around me, I'm never fully there. It's like I live a double life, but each life takes place simultaneously alongside the other. Everything comes at me through a filter of "What does this REALLY mean, and what should I think or feel or do about it?" 

This is how everything is processed. 

And I react, but I'm always vigilant of my own reactions. Everything comes back out through another filter, I am always making sure what I do or say balances out or makes sense with whatever implications or preconceived notions I have about whatever is happening. 

Okay, does that make ANY sense at all?


----------



## LostFavor (Aug 18, 2011)

Often I feel like I'm drifting through life and yet at the same time, I'm always planning something, whether it's one minute ahead or five years ahead. The more distant the plan is, the less detail I give it but there's always something going on in the future. Maybe it's not even a plan. Maybe it's a fantasy of some event that could take place and I imagine an interaction with another person.

Occasionally, I stop and I think real hard about it all and try to make sense of it. Sometimes even to the point of writing out a description of various stuff that's going through my head. I'll iron out a concept or a plan or an idea until all of it's parts are logically connected from the first to the last. But I don't always know which part is the first or which is the last. The important part is more that I can piece each piece together until the pieces eventually make one big piece that I can encapsulate in a small, bite-sized understanding.

Then I can share the understanding or just keep it in my head for further analysis. Sometimes I'm not comfortable sharing the understanding because I don't feel I've sufficiently tested it and pieced it together. Sometimes I do share the understanding but then I realize that in sharing it, the understanding needs revising. I then add to it or subtract from it and make something new - but always bite-sized.

I feel conflicted and blind if I cannot put information in something small. But then sometimes I feel like I'm deceiving others because I put out those pieces that I've so thoroughly examined and I share them in such a concretely confident, factual way. And, at times, people will take those pieces at face value even though I'm fallible and my confidence is born of thorough analysis not factual accuracy.


----------

