# The Most Future-Oriented Dominant Intuitive



## INTJellectual (Oct 22, 2011)

Which one do you think is the one who thinks about future too much and is oblivious to the present-moment?

EDIT: typo...

The Most Future-Oriented Dominant Intuitive


----------



## jakojako (Jul 5, 2012)

Ni is by definition more future oriented than Ne, so that eliminates ENTP and ENFP. It's either INTJ or INFJ.


----------



## elixare (Aug 26, 2010)

It's either INTJ or INFJ

I'm voting INTJ just because Ni-Te is more systematic than Ni-Fe and actually takes cause and effect into account in its predictions and can therefore make predictions with greater accuracy whereas Ni-Fe is not as scientific and often have that "crazy paranormal psychic" aura to it which lessens its credibility, though of course, it's still future-oriented

And of course, the Ne types are wannabe futurists, but really Ne's extraverted nature makes it more dependent on external stimuli that exist in the here and now compared to Ni...They are therefore not as future oriented as Ni due to the greater relative here and now orientation compared to Ni...Ne's true forte is really in brainstorming ideas whereas dealing with the future is more of Ni's forte, though of course Ne types love to try to compete with Ni in trying to be a "futurist" all the time...

There is a reason why Ni is called the "Seer" function


----------



## MuChApArAdOx (Jan 24, 2011)

childofprodigy said:


> It's either INTJ or INFJ
> 
> I'm voting INTJ just because Ni-Te is more systematic than Ni-Fe and actually takes cause and effect into account in its predictions and can therefore make predictions with greater accuracy whereas Ni-Fe is not as scientific and often have that "crazy paranormal psychic" aura to it which lessens its credibility, though of course, it's still future-oriented
> 
> ...


I disagree, Ni is a subjective function, so therefore the future is based on their personal internal findings, subjectively. Ne is objective, it sees and focuses on the realities of the future objectively .


----------



## elixare (Aug 26, 2010)

MuChApArAdOx said:


> I disagree, Ni is a subjective function, so therefore the future is based on their personal internal findings, subjectively. Ne is objective, it sees and focuses on the realities of the future objectively .


Not if you combine Ni and Se...Ni-Se > Ne-Si in terms of future orientation...You can derive the objectivity through Se and project far into the future internally through Ni (plus there's also objectivity derived from Te)...Also subjective personal internal finding does not imply innacurate...it's just that the process happens internally and is focused on what's important to the subject compared to Ne's non-selective nature, which once again is another strong point compared to Ne-Si since you can then focus on the future projections that actually matter to you/your goals and are therefore more relevant to your life instead of Ne's more scattered approach


----------



## Planisphere (Apr 24, 2012)

I find Ne to be more scatter-brained, true, but I don't really see it as any more or less 'here-and-now' than Ni. The basic premise of Intuition is opposite that of Sensing, which has as it's own default definition: 'living in and/or for the present'. I don't think I've ever known more than one real xNTP, but I know he was quite future-oriented. I guess the difference is that he was more apathetic about the future than the ENTJ I met later in life.

I'm extremely future-oriented. Then again, this doesn't seem that uncommon among other xNTPs. Maybe the difference lies in the inferior functions between INTJs and ENTPs? Using Se, the INTJ could be more capable of making future predictions (from a personal standpoint) based on present events, whereas the ENTP could be more capable of making future predictions (from an impersonal standpoint) based on past experiences and/or observations.


----------



## MuChApArAdOx (Jan 24, 2011)

childofprodigy said:


> Not if you combine Ni and Se...Ni-Se > Ne-Si in terms of future orientation...You can derive the objectivity through Se and project far into the future internally through Ni (plus there's also objectivity derived from Te)...Also subjective personal internal finding does not imply innacurate...it's just that the process happens internally and is focused on what's important to the subject compared to Ne's non-selective nature, which once again is another strong point compared to Ne-Si since you can then focus on the future projections that actually matter to you/your goals and are therefore more relevant to your life instead of Ne's more scattered approach


Ne is only scattered to those who can't follow. Put 2 Ne users in the same room who can follow the other, neither would think the other was scattered. Ne combined with Te is the future  . Ne is constantly jumping and leaping towards the future, where Ni is breaking down their findings. Ne is all about leaping into the future for more and more possibilities. Connecting dots and following patterns in order to predict the next line of predictable patterns.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

Ne dominance is the most "futuristic" for sure (Ni dominance would be more of this "universal" kind of intuition that defies the constraints of time and space (as is experienced or perceived in everyday happenings drawn from Si interpretations), but applies more to underlying phenomena in an "as it is" sense (inferior Se subtly behind this)). I was reading this educational comic for a class recently where the character narrarator was predicting the future trends of comics and where they came from/are going like a classic Ne dom. Ne tends to form metaphysical connections between "events" (more than "phenomena" like Ni), so that predicting trends is first nature to these types.


----------



## elixare (Aug 26, 2010)

MuChApArAdOx said:


> Ne is only scattered to those who can't follow. Put 2 Ne users in the same room who can follow the other, neither would think the other was scattered. Ne combined with Te is the future  . Ne is constantly jumping and leaping towards the future, where Ni is breaking down their findings. Ne is all about leaping into the future for more and more possibilities. Connecting dots and following patterns in order to predict the next line of predictable patterns.


Exactly, Ne may be able to generate more possibilities of what may happen than Ni, but ultimately the future is only going to unfold in one way only and while this actual unfolding of the system may be one of the possibilities generated by the Ne user, there's still going to be lots of "junk" possibilities that end up not happening, which is why Ne is more "scattered"...Ni on the other hand zeroes in and is focused on the actual highest likelihood set events that will actually happen given the totality of the sum of the the Ni user's subjective knowledge...While Ne is better at generating the set of events that MAY happen, Ni is better at zeroing in on the set of events that WILL happen hence rendering Ni more useful in terms of future orientation....

Ni afterall is the most abstract function of them all bar none, ie. Ne is closer to the "concrete" side of the equation than Ni in the abstract-concrete dichotomy (in fact, all other non-Ni functions are closer to the concrete dichotomy than Ni) (once again, this has to do with the limitations of extraversion which by its nature requires an objective stimulus (and objective stimuli only exist in the here and now) unlike the introverted function which require no objective stimulus whatsoever and can therefore transcend time and space)

In any case, INTJ is still winning the poll by a large margin


----------



## Kito (Jan 6, 2012)

Ne isn't future-oriented, but it's not really in the present either. It's just away in some alternate reality. :tongue:


----------



## firedell (Aug 5, 2009)

The Ne types.


----------



## Owfin (Oct 15, 2011)

*notices that you can vote for more than one*

*checks all*


----------



## ebullientcorner (Oct 5, 2012)

*scratches head. .....the....Fu..ture?.... *blank look. ...........?









childofprodigy said:


> Exactly, Ne may be able to generate more possibilities of what may happen than Ni, but ultimately the future is only going to unfold in one way only and while this actual unfolding of the system may be one of the possibilities generated by the Ne user, there's still going to be lots of "junk" possibilities that end up not happening, which is why Ne is more "scattered"...Ni on the other hand zeroes in and is focused on the actual highest likelihood set events that will actually happen given the totality of the sum of the the Ni user's subjective knowledge...While Ne is better at generating the set of events that MAY happen, Ni is better at zeroing in on the set of events that WILL happen hence rendering Ni more useful in terms of future orientation....
> 
> Ni afterall is the most abstract function of them all bar none, ie. Ne is closer to the "concrete" side of the equation than Ni in the abstract-concrete dichotomy (in fact, all other non-Ni functions are closer to the concrete dichotomy than Ni) (once again, this has to do with the limitations of extraversion which by its nature requires an objective stimulus (and objective stimuli only exist in the here and now) unlike the introverted function which require no objective stimulus whatsoever and can therefore transcend time and space)
> 
> In any case, INTJ is still winning the poll by a large margin


I really like what you are saying here. My mother in law is an INTJ. She owns her own business, and she is on top of everything. She almost has a sixth sense of what is going to happen about everything.

She is a contingency planner I guess for a lack of a better way of saying it and no caffeine yet. 


S is concrete, N goes more abstract, but I'm interested to think why you think Ni more abstract than Ne? I would think it would have a lot more to do with how the secondary informs the primary.

I wouldn't say that I'm the most abstract, but I would never say that my mother in law is one tenth as abstract as my INTP husband...but maybe I'm misconceiving your definition I think.

I wouldn't say that my husband or I am exactly future oriented. I am probably the most "P" person alive. I am wildly idea oriented, with them flying everywhere all the time. I never stop thinking. And I am capable of pushing ideas out there to consider the future if I think it's necessary, but it's sort of a stretch for me. When I consider the future it is to dream. It's not to plan or actually consider what will happen, and when specifics happen, let's just say yikes. Personally, and I'm not really saying it's true of all ENFP's, but I think it would be arrogant for me to claim this one.

But I'm newer to cognitive functions, so let me know your theories yeah?


----------



## Zero11 (Feb 7, 2010)

Ne is objective and therefore more oriented towards the near future and not mainly concerned with long-term prediction like Ni.


----------



## MuChApArAdOx (Jan 24, 2011)

childofprodigy said:


> Exactly, Ne may be able to generate more possibilities of what may happen than Ni, but ultimately the future is only going to unfold in one way only and while this actual unfolding of the system may be one of the possibilities generated by the Ne user, there's still going to be lots of "junk" possibilities that end up not happening, which is why Ne is more "scattered"...Ni on the other hand zeroes in and is focused on the actual highest likelihood set events that will actually happen given the totality of the sum of the the Ni user's subjective knowledge...While Ne is better at generating the set of events that MAY happen, Ni is better at zeroing in on the set of events that WILL happen hence rendering Ni more useful in terms of future orientation....
> 
> Ni afterall is the most abstract function of them all bar none, ie. Ne is closer to the "concrete" side of the equation than Ni in the abstract-concrete dichotomy (in fact, all other non-Ni functions are closer to the concrete dichotomy than Ni) (once again, this has to do with the limitations of extraversion which by its nature requires an objective stimulus (and objective stimuli only exist in the here and now) unlike the introverted function which require no objective stimulus whatsoever and can therefore transcend time and space)
> 
> In any case, INTJ is still winning the poll by a large margin


Again, Ne does appear scattered for those who can't follow the leaping and jumping of obvious predictions. 2 Ne users don't have to relate details to why they are jumping to the next finding, they can have a whole conversation without saying a single word 

Where have you read that Ni is the most abstract of them all ? Is there such a thing of something being more abstract than another. How can one measure the depth of abstract ? If we both see things in an abstract way, how can we express to the other externally who is seeing the greater abstract of an object ? Abstract is something that really can't be put into words because its based on tones and images. So you're saying that you could describe what you see abstractly ? And if you could you believe it means your abstract images are more in depth than the one who couldn't. Unless you can read minds there is no way you can measure what people are seeing abstractly, and what depth of the image is. So i have to again disagree with you on this observation.

And polls, heh, well would you really expect anything different ? They mean nothing.

My husband leads with Ni ( INTJ) and he would agree that Ne is much more in the future than Ni. This combo is actually really interesting because of how they can go hand in hand. Ne picks up on all the obvious predictions while Ni is breaking them down . Ne isn`t interested in the why or doesn't pick it apart, because it knows that the next prediction will have that answer leading to the next pattern of predictions. Ni sits and stews about it's findings while Ne is off gathering more data that the Ni hasn't seen yet. I agree that Ne isn't always accurate in their findings ( Neither is Ni ), although Ne doesn't sit and pick it apart wondering what is right or wrong about it, Ne will keep going until it makes a accurate correlation between the patterns.


----------



## Zero11 (Feb 7, 2010)

@*MuChApArAdOx*

Only if there is a misunderstanding here :shocked:
In which terms do you define "most future oriented"? According to Lenore Thomson and Grigoriy Reinin, Ne does this in Space and Ni in Time.


----------

