# Question for Ni doms



## Chest (Apr 14, 2014)

Does your Ni fail you sometimes? I mean, does it give you misinterpreted predictions?...I don't know cause I'm and INFP but I was curious as how Ni works for you


----------



## Laxgort (Apr 12, 2014)

Usually not. When I know something, I know it and it's real. The problem comes when Ni says: HEY, WE'LL DO A FUCKING PREDICTION WITHOUT SENSE! And you are like oh man why I have to know things if people ignores my advices/I don't know how to explain it...


----------



## Chest (Apr 14, 2014)

Laxgort said:


> Usually not. When I know something, I know it and it's real. The problem comes when Ni says: HEY, WE'LL DO A FUCKING PREDICTION WITHOUT SENSE! And you are like oh man why I have to know things if people ignores my advices/I don't know how to explain it...


what if something is intentionally manufactured to misguide you?


----------



## Laxgort (Apr 12, 2014)

Chest said:


> what if something is intentionally manufactured to misguide you?


Can you tell me an example?


----------



## LostFavor (Aug 18, 2011)

Pretty much what @Laxgort said. Lot of the time it's right, but if I force Ni to give me something when it's yielding nothing, then it's just going to give me a look something like this:

:dry:

And give me some bullshit insight that is most likely wrong. 

Similarly, if I have inaccurate information, then I can definitely come up with an insight that is wrong. But because I don't know that the information is inaccurate at the time, I'll probably remember the insight as being right. I mean, if my insight relies on the Earth being flat and someone later points out, "What time period are you living in, jackass?" Then I'm fucked.


----------



## Chest (Apr 14, 2014)

ok I got it, it can go wrong if you recieve inaccurate information, even if that information was somewhat accidental.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

It's subjective understanding so it can't fail, since it's tailor-made to fit my own perspective of how I see something. Has nothing to do with predictions and the like. As an example of how I understand the American flag from an Ni perspective:



> The American flag stands for unity, liberty and freedom. The fifty stars representing all the states connects to a sense of larger social collective, that everyone is equally represented into a sum of a larger whole while still independent from each other. United they stand strong. It's freedom from the British regime, being liberated and now independent as a child would moving out from home. As such a sense of novelty and need for exploration also seems to permeate the American culture with the notion of the American dream, that anyone can succeed in the land of the free. Americans explore the world in childlike wonder and firmly believe in that one can always move against all opposition as long one believes in that anything is possible. Hard work and dedication will bring you where you want to go without fail.


See, what makes this subjective perception (with a tint of judgement) is that it is _my_ perception and not someone else's. Others may sorely disagree with that this is the actual meaning of the American flag because to them it means something different. Yet it all taps into the collective unconsciousness of archetype ideas (freedom, liberty, unity etc) that I think most people would still be willing to admit are a part of what the flag symbolically represents.


----------



## VoodooDolls (Jul 30, 2013)

The bad understanding of the function itself lead people to miss-type themselves, i agree with you above me, Ni is something people often take as mere prediction when actually those are coming from other functions, the whole picture, every detail coming from just one object and relating it to higher wide meaning traces is something i do quite a lot, so i can say i use Ni, my problem is how to measure it and determine if i prefer it among Ne. Everyone uses every damn function, but how are you so secure when it comes to measuring them? if every situation leads to the contemplation for each?, can we more or less just subconsciously giving importance to some letting ourselves be guided by our own beliefs and discarding others in the process?. There is so much more hiding behind definitions and people seem to forget about that.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

DonutsGalacticos said:


> The bad understanding of the function itself lead people to miss-type themselves, i agree with you above me, Ni is something people often take as mere prediction when actually those are coming from other functions, the whole picture, every detail coming from just one object and relating it to higher wide meaning traces is something i do quite a lot, so i can say i use Ni, my problem is how to measure it and determine if i prefer it among Ne. Everyone uses every damn function, but how are you so secure when it comes to measuring them? if every situation leads to the contemplation for each?, can we more or less just subconsciously giving importance to some letting ourselves be guided by our own beliefs and discarding others in the process?. There is so much more hiding behind definitions and people seem to forget about that.


You don't measure it. Either you see people's cognition or you don't, I guess. They exist in the realms of intangibles, so not everyone is necessarily capable of observing them unless they know of other means of doing so than seeing them in themselves.


----------



## LostFavor (Aug 18, 2011)

DonutsGalacticos said:


> Ni is something people often take as mere prediction when actually those are coming from other functions


No one in here said prediction is the only thing Ni can do. And what other functions? 

For someone who is claiming the falsity of an entire line of thought that's widely agreed upon, you're sure being vague.


----------



## Kathy Kane (Dec 3, 2013)

ephemereality said:


> It's subjective understanding so it can't fail, since it's tailor-made to fit my own perspective of how I see something. Has nothing to do with predictions and the like. As an example of how I understand the American flag from an Ni perspective:
> 
> 
> 
> See, what makes this subjective perception (with a tint of judgement) is that it is _my_ perception and not someone else's. Others may sorely disagree with that this is the actual meaning of the American flag because to them it means something different. Yet it all taps into the collective unconsciousness of archetype ideas (freedom, liberty, unity etc) that I think most people would still be willing to admit are a part of what the flag symbolically represents.


You should have used that as an example of abstract thinking in your other thread. Though, it's actually abstract feeling (value judgement). That example isn't perception. It sound more like something in a text book about the flag.

Intuitive perception is looking at the object and observing intangible facts about it. 

For example:


> The USA flag is filled with lines of alternating color and space in-between. It's structured and boxy, yet it has an artistic pattern to it. The top left is a box of a different color and it has a lot of objects of the same shape inside it. The person who designed it has a point-of-view where everything is in it's place. Aesthetically the shapes are perfect and unbending. The motive behind it is a design that is professional, upstanding, rigid, clear, and all inclusive. It is hard, strong, and bold. The sense of being unbeatable comes across as the main theme.


I don't know much about the artists of the flag or why they designed it that way. Though, now I'm interested to see how close my perception actually is to the truth.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Kathy Kane said:


> You should have used that as an example of abstract thinking in your other thread. Though, it's actually abstract feeling (value judgement). That example isn't perception. It sound more like something in a text book about the flag.
> 
> Intuitive perception is looking at the object and observing intangible facts about it.
> 
> ...


Your example is Thinking through and through. You are analyzing the logical qualities of the flag, how it's made up. You are looking at the logical structure. You aren't actually analyzing it based on an intuitive primordial image. The only thing that comes close to intuition is the final portion at the end here:



> It is hard, strong, and bold. The sense of being unbeatable comes across as the main theme.


Though it is decidedly laden with Feeling-judgement.

Perception and intuition in particular, is about whence it came and whither it goes. You absolutely failed in producing such an analysis.


----------



## Chest (Apr 14, 2014)

ephemereality said:


> It's subjective understanding so it can't fail, since it's tailor-made to fit my own perspective of how I see something. Has nothing to do with predictions and the like.


sometimes I forget it's subjective


----------



## Kathy Kane (Dec 3, 2013)

ephemereality said:


> Your example is Thinking through and through. You are analyzing the logical qualities of the flag, how it's made up. You are looking at the logical structure. You aren't actually analyzing it based on an intuitive primordial image. The only thing that comes close to intuition is the final portion at the end here:


Perception is observations. I'm not sure if you know the difference between that and logic. Logic is reasoning, not what we see, which is what my perception description included. Yours was full of value reasoning, it actually included very little observations. 



> Though it is decidedly laden with Feeling-judgement.
> 
> Perception and intuition in particular, is about whence it came and whither it goes. You absolutely failed in producing such an analysis.


Analysis is judgement. So if you were intentionally using "analysis" in your description that is probably why it was mainly judgement.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Kathy Kane said:


> Perception is observations. I'm not sure if you know the difference between that and logic. Logic is reasoning, not what we see, which is what my perception description included. Yours was full of value reasoning, it actually included very little observations.
> 
> Analysis is judgement. So if you were intentionally using "analysis" in your description that is probably why it was mainly judgement.












You're so fucking literal it's ridiculous.


----------



## Kathy Kane (Dec 3, 2013)

ephemereality said:


> You're so fucking literal it's ridiculous.


Am I supposed to assume you are always writing in analogies? If so, you're not doing a very good job of it. If you don't actually mean what you say, then you should give some indication that your next words aren't meant to be taken literally. 

More to the point, you should actually use words to get your meaning across. I'm not in your head. I can't possibly know what weird definitions you have come up with for the words you use.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Kathy Kane said:


> Am I supposed to assume you are always writing in analogies? If so, you're not doing a very good job of it. If you don't actually mean what you say, then you should give some indication that your next words aren't meant to be taken literally.


That's so fucking funny coming from a supposed Ni dominant. Good to see that even you admitted to being a sensor there. 



> More to the point, you should actually use words to get your meaning across. I'm not in your head. I can't possibly know what weird definitions you have come up with for the words you use.


I should lol? I actually think the meaning is really fucking clear if you bothered to try to really understand it.


----------



## Abraxas (May 28, 2011)

It's pretty hard to subjectively describe a function you've differentiated when the only subjective comparison you can make are to your own undifferentiated functions.

I've tried it in the past, but it's obvious if you read my descriptions that my other functions are always involved in my intuition. It's never just one function - it's just that I'm not really noticing the other ones because they're not differentiated to me.

There's a couple of points I should make though.


One is that Jung doesn't know how intuition works. I don't know how else to say that. Jung doesn't know how intuition works and admits this. I'm not sure anyone has figured it out yet. Thomson, Berens, Nardi, etc. You'll have to do some more research, but as far as I know _nobody does_. Everything is speculation. Like, we know _what_ intuition does, but not _how_ it does it.

Another point is that intuition is "getting a hunch" about something. So it is predictive. Jung actually _did_ mean it in the sense of predicting events - he was specific about that. He believed that intuition dealt with a perception/awareness of time. I like symmetrical ideas, so I might even suspect that - in the extraverted attitude - sensation perceives objects/events in space, whereas intuition perceives objects/events in time. In the introverted attitude, this is seen as subjective information rather than objective - coming from internal (who we are) rather than external factors (what the world is).


----------



## Abraxas (May 28, 2011)

OH, and for the OP, @ephemereality put it very well.

Ni is perception, so it's can't be wrong - in the same way that extraverted perception, or any form of perception can't be wrong. "Right" and "wrong" are matters of judgment, not perception. Perception just lets you know that something exists. But you can misinterpret the content of your perception when trying to define it. It's the meaning of perceptions that can be confusing.

I know that sounds like a boring nit-pick, but it's an often overlooked facet of how the functions work that leads to a lot of misconceptions.


----------



## FlaviaGemina (May 3, 2012)

ephemereality said:


> The American flag stands for unity, liberty and freedom. The fifty stars representing all the states connects to a sense of larger social collective, that everyone is equally represented into a sum of a larger whole while still independent from each other. United they stand strong.* It's freedom from the British regime, being liberated and now independent as a child would moving out from home. As such a sense of novelty and need for exploration also seems to permeate the American culture with the notion of the American dream, that anyone can succeed in the land of the free. Americans explore the world in childlike wonder and firmly believe in that one can always move against all opposition as long one believes in that anything is possible. Hard work and dedication will bring you where you want to go without fail.*


Sorry luv, but this isn't a purely subjective, 100% Ni interpretation. You use lots of 'facts' about US culture and read them into the flag, rather than getting them out of the flag, especially in the bold part. That part doesn't even say _how_ those aspects of U.S. culture are represented in the flag. So... there's a huge gap in there. Does that make it an 'intuitive leap'? No, it just shows that either you can't be bothered to explain it or it is indeed not connected.
Even the bit about unity, liberty and freedom is based on convention, as it is used in the flags of lots of countries with the same meaning.


enchantedlearning.com said:


> *RED, WHITE, and BLUE* are often colors the represent revolution and freedom, many of which are based upon the French tricolor.


There's a lot of Te in this in that you use common knowledge. None of what you said is particularly subjective.


----------



## Octavian (Nov 24, 2013)

[No message]


----------



## Bricolage (Jul 29, 2012)

@Octavian - Imaginary like your understanding of Jung and function pairs. :wink:


----------



## PaladinX (Feb 20, 2013)

@_Bricolage_ & @_Octavian_

I'm not really sure what you guys are on about. I would like to say that "axis" refers to a function and it's opposite. For example: Ti-Fe. A "function pair" refers to the two middle letters in your MBTI type. In Jungian function terms, that's your dom-aux.


----------



## Octavian (Nov 24, 2013)

Bricolage said:


> @Octavian - Imaginary like your understanding of Jung and function pairs. :wink:


Jung: 



> d. The Principal and Auxiliary Functions
> 
> Closer investigation shows with great regularity that, besides the most differentiated function, another, less differentiated function of _secondary_ importance is invariably present in consciousness and exerts a co-determining influence [...] Experience shows that the secondary function is always one whose nature is different from, though _not antagonistic_ to the primary function.
> 
> ...


p.405-406, Princeton-Bollingen.

Imaginary like your ability to read.


----------



## Octavian (Nov 24, 2013)

PaladinX said:


> @_Bricolage_ & @_Octavian_
> 
> I'm not really sure what you guys are on about. I would like to say that "axis" refers to a function and it's opposite. For example: Ti-Fe. A "function pair" refers to the two middle letters in your MBTI type. In Jungian function terms, that's your dom-aux.


I've never seen Jung use the term "function pair." As for the definition of "function pair" it is contradictory. I've seen it defined as the interaction between the dominant and inferior function, but also as the middle two letters of the MBTI type which would indeed allude to the dom+aux. The definition alluding to the dom+inferior is more prevalent however. Both definitions seem to be attributed to Myers-Briggs and I've no ability to source as I own nothing of Myers-Briggs.

Axis as used by MB, alludes to the dichotomies, I vs. E, N vs. S and etc.

The word axis, as I understand it, alludes to a reference line by which a body / structure rotates, or a literal bisection reflecting a mirror image (as used in anatomy or botany.) The Ni-Te axis would form a horizontal axis as orienting by I/E. Thinking and feeling would form a vertical axis orienting by T/F. Sensing and Intuition would form a horizontal axis as orienting by S/F. etc. etc.









So long as the functions aren't of the same preference and are turned to the opposing direction an axis can be formed but I specifically alluded to the Ni-Te axis and as you can see, my use of the term axis is not incorrect. Whether function pair be defined as dom+aux or dom+inferior is irrelevant as I explicitly stated what I was talking about in depth, which was not the dom+inferior.
@Bricolage


----------



## Bricolage (Jul 29, 2012)

Octavian said:


> I've never seen Jung use the term "function pair."


I don't remember saying the term "function pair" derived from Jung.


----------



## Octavian (Nov 24, 2013)

Bricolage said:


> I don't remember saying the term "function pair" derived from Jung.


I remember you implying that, along with nonsense like "The perceiving function works independently of the auxiliary." In any case I admit to getting a bit too annoyed with all this.


----------



## Bricolage (Jul 29, 2012)

Octavian said:


> I remember you implying that, along with nonsense like "The perceiving function works independently of the auxiliary." In any case I admit to getting a bit too annoyed with all this.


I didn't imply that at all. If the lead function is perceiving, so is the inferior function, which forms a function pair with the lead function. Same thing if lead-inferior are judging functions.


----------



## Bricolage (Jul 29, 2012)

Octavian said:


> I remember you implying that, along with nonsense like "The perceiving function works independently of the auxiliary." In any case I admit to getting a bit too annoyed with all this.


This is what I originally wrote - "You need to understand that Ni (perceiving function) works independently of Te (judging function)." You're pulling things out of your ass again. I'm not sure where you confabulated that quote from.


----------



## Octavian (Nov 24, 2013)

Bricolage said:


> This is what I originally wrote - "You need to understand that Ni (perceiving function) works independently of Te (judging function)." You're pulling things out of your ass again.


Pulling things out of my ass by sourcing my claims, posting literal models, and expanding upon my reasoning. Right.

I didn't bother to quote you exactly but the meaning conveyed and notion communicated is effectively the same and just as *incorrect* on your behalf.


----------



## Bricolage (Jul 29, 2012)

Octavian said:


> Pulling things out of my ass by sourcing my shit, posting literal models, and expanding upon my reasoning.


Nope - by misquoting someone.


----------



## Bricolage (Jul 29, 2012)

Octavian said:


> Pulling things out of my ass by sourcing my claims, posting literal models, and expanding upon my reasoning. Right.
> 
> I didn't bother to quote you exactly but the meaning conveyed and notion communicated is effectively the same and just as *incorrect* on your behalf.


You're wrong again in implying that I said Jung used the term "function pair."


----------



## Octavian (Nov 24, 2013)

Bricolage said:


> You're wrong again in implying that I said Jung used the term "function pair."


That was in response to Paladinx. Wth is wrong with you.


----------



## Bricolage (Jul 29, 2012)

Octavian said:


> Wth is wrong with you.


Seems like you could use that dictionary after all.


----------



## FlaviaGemina (May 3, 2012)

Abraxas said:


> Oh! Thank you, that's interesting. I didn't know he'd gone that far with it.


Check our his video, though, because I'm not sure I remember it correctly.


----------



## Bricolage (Jul 29, 2012)

Octavian said:


> I remember you implying that, along with nonsense like "The perceiving function works independently of the auxiliary." In any case I admit to getting a bit too annoyed with all this.





> I don't remember saying the term "function pair" derived from Jung.


Refresher for ya.


----------



## FlaviaGemina (May 3, 2012)

Bricolage said:


> That sounds more like inferior Ne of ISXJ types.


No it doesn't. Well.... I can see how you would think it does in that any kind of anxiety would seem ISXJ to some people.
But nope... I think what it is is that the climate where I work is extremely stressful and depressing and there is absolutely no way for it to improve because the general pattern of it has been to get worse and worse and worse. So I haven't had a chance to use Ni much except in a negative and paranoid way.
I'm very familiar with the doom and gloom of inferior Ne, seeing as my husband is an ISTJ. He predicts negative things from small details, e.g. if there's a small one-off change in his routine, he thinks it will be forever and frets terribly. I can do something non-routine as a one-off without stressing. Also, possibilities/alternatives/what-if scenarios frighten him. He has literally said so. They don't frighten me, it's just that not all possibilities are equality realistic.


----------



## Serpent (Aug 6, 2015)

10:40 - 12:10

Not exactly contributing or implying anything, but this particular scene seems like introverted intuition (probably Ni-Te). Of course, my knowledge of cognitive functions is still rudimentary, so I might be incorrect (in fact, that is quite plausible). The character is probably an INTJ, by the way.

Caution - can be a potential spoiler for those who haven't finished watching Death Note (or at least, until episode 33), considering the ones who are currently watching it.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

ScarrDragon said:


> 10:40 - 12:10
> 
> Not exactly contributing or implying anything, but this particular scene seems like introverted intuition (probably Ni-Te). Of course, my knowledge of cognitive functions is still rudimentary, so I might be incorrect (in fact, that is quite plausible). The character is probably an INTJ, by the way.
> 
> Caution - can be a potential spoiler for those who haven't finished watching Death Note (or at least, until episode 33), considering the ones who are currently watching it.


Which character are you thinking of? Because two of them appear in that clip segment. The latter idk name because I never got that far before I dropped it, seems xNFJ.


----------



## Serpent (Aug 6, 2015)

ephemereality said:


> Which character are you thinking of? Because two of them appear in that clip segment. The latter idk name because I never got that far before I dropped it, seems xNFJ.


The one with the wild white hair appareled in a white lab-coat, Near. Yeah, now that I think about it, I can see the latter (Mikami) as an an xNFJ, but he's unanimously typed as an ISTJ (possibly another stereotype, because he's organized, intensely loyal and dutiful, follows a strict and rigid routine [to the extent that it cost him terribly in the end, but no spoilers!] and often draws upon past experiences) . Of course, consensual opinions can often be erroneous. In fact, such conjectures are prone to being incorrect because eventually, they get established and people start accepting them by principle, not bothering to challenge them.

Here's an introduction of his character.

* *


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

ScarrDragon said:


> The one with the wild white hair appareled in a white lab-coat, Near. Yeah, now that I think about it, I can see the latter (Mikami) as an an xNFJ, but he's unanimously typed as an ISTJ (possibly another stereotype, because he's organized, intensely loyal and dutiful, follows a strict and rigid routine [to the extent that it cost him terribly in the end, but no spoilers!] and often draws upon past experiences) . Of course, consensual opinions can often be erroneous. In fact, such conjectures are prone to being incorrect because eventually, they get established and people start accepting them by principle, not bothering to challenge them.
> 
> Here's an introduction of his character.
> 
> * *


Also, something about Near seems ISTP-ish to me, not necessarily Te-Fi-ish.


----------



## Siggy (May 25, 2009)

*OK gang

Lets stop the insults please.

thanks
*


----------



## INFPwn (May 14, 2010)

I'm liking the discussion about the U.S. flag. What cognitive functions, if any, would the following fragment belie? 

"The American flag is built up from a succession of red and white stripes, with a blue box in the upper left corner which contains fifty stars, each one representing a State. It hangs in many American classrooms, where students pledge their allegiance to the flag. It has become omnipresent in pop culture all around the world, to the point of having become a sort of meaningless commercial symbol, i.e. being printed on bed sheets, mugs and t-shirts. In the Middle East, the flag is often burned by protesters lashing out against American Imperialism. etc."


----------



## epicenter (Jan 8, 2014)

Back to OP, my Ni usually doesn't fail unless I'm stressed. When I'm in a NiTi phase or just 'peopled out' and go into in Se mode, I don't trust Ni.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

INFPwn said:


> I'm liking the discussion about the U.S. flag. What cognitive functions, if any, would the following fragment belie?
> 
> "The American flag is built up from a succession of red and white stripes, with a blue box in the upper left corner which contains fifty stars, each one representing a State.


SiTe



> It hangs in many American classrooms, where students pledge their allegiance to the flag.


TeNeSi



> It has become omnipresent in pop culture all around the world, to the point of having become a *sort of meaningless commercial symbol*, i.e. being printed on bed sheets, mugs and t-shirts.


Part in bold is Fi, Te, Ne



> In the Middle East, the flag is often burned by protesters lashing out against American Imperialism. etc."


Te.


----------

