# Ne doesn't have meaning



## Old Intern (Nov 20, 2012)

johnnyyukon said:


> haha, but yes ^^^
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I don't know what you guys are talking about at all! Ne having a base in Si? Understanding the world through your experience might be partially Ti influenced but - I just don't get what you are saying - can you give an example?

Ne is not an interpretation, that would make it judgement, Ne is just seeing. Seeing based on past experience is exactly opposite to Ne. You may temper actions with Si - I just don't get this interplay of Si with Ne - wouldn't that just be contaminated, muddled nothing? The only good of Ne is to see with fresh uninhibited openness.

For me, developed Si, only means being aware of sensual experience as a tool for it's effect on me, and environments for people I interact with. Things like how much disorder becomes counter productive because it ultimately has impact on my mood or the mood of those I'm close to.
Recognizing I need to eat or rest at a point where it would be destructive to ignore physical needs. Or knowing certain moods of music or recording artists, that help me transition to a necessary change of focus for managing my life. -this seems like minor routine stuff and I don't see it mixing in with my over-all perspective or primary way of being in the world - just a support, maintenance function.

But I am asking, wanting to know what is meant -like maybe your examples?

BTW, @tanstaafl28 Sorry for your loss, a lot has happened recently?


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

Hohoho!
My standpoint on reality is more meaningful than yours...

Just face your shadow and get over with it.
Ne is as meaningful as all the other directions, it is just that some don't put value on it.
It seems that you are one of them.


----------



## johnnyyukon (Nov 8, 2013)

Old Intern said:


> I don't know what you guys are talking about at all! Ne having a base in Si? Understanding the world through your experience might be partially Ti influenced but - I just don't get what you are saying - can you give an example?
> 
> Ne is not an interpretation, that would make it judgement, Ne is just seeing. Seeing based on past experience is exactly opposite to Ne. You may temper actions with Si - I just don't get this interplay of Si with Ne - wouldn't that just be contaminated, muddled nothing? The only good of Ne is to see with fresh uninhibited openness.
> 
> ...



I'll say that I don't think Si is a base for Ne. Like you said, Si (memories from past experiences) can temper actions, or anchor all those wild possibilities you have to something more realistic. 

They're all interrelated. So here's an example I wrote, and maybe YOU can shed some light on what's what, because honestly, Ne always hurts my brain thinking about it. Seems one of the more misunderstood functions and I am NO expert.

Example:

I went scuba diving recently. With a class (unfortunately) that was getting their basic certification. Me and my scuba "buddy," already certified and got the clear from the instructor to do our own thing on the second dive (I was there to get nitrox certified). They go down to do drills, and we talk where we wanna go at the surface. Time to go, but he's put on a neoprene hood on TOP of his wetsuit (fucking cold, 45 degrees that morning) thus adding more buoyancy. 

He could NOT sink, haha.

But I didn't want to ruin Dive #2 of the day. Tried a few things, but ultimately, without more weights, he was staying on the top. I didn't have extra weights, and it's a HUGE no-no to dive without a buddy.

What to do? Brainstormed possibilities.

Call it a day?(fuck!) Go off alone? Get to the instructor to ask for more weights? but having to go alone 40 feet down (I didn't have a problem with it, just...possible consequences)? Interrupt the class of 6 people? Instructor going to yell at me for interrupting class/diving alone (he's literally a green beret)? Hand signal to the other Dive master? And on and on...

I DID go down alone, was literally like 2 feet away from instructor but just couldn't bring myself to cause the whole class to resurface (if only I had a water proof writing tablet, he wouldn't have to. "Where are extra weights?"). I also looked for the other Dive Master that said he'd come with us, but these 2 ladies had kicked up allllll this super fine silt at the bottom of the grotto (morons) and visibility was shit. I did manage to find and signal him on a 3rd attempt RIGHT as the rest of the class was done. *sigh

If I had more experience, more Si of this situation, I could have eliminated SOO many of those options. Improved on others.

That outfit always keeps spare weights RIGHT ON THE DOCK 10 feet from where we were, though it was elevated. Felt like a moron. And he said later it would have been ok to tap him on the shoulder. 

Now, almost all this "what to do?? what to do?? allll these factors!" were stewing in my subconscious, and all in my head for the moment, no action yet. I didn't know WHY I didn't tap him on the shoulder, just felt off. Then later, Ti, it all came together in my head.


----------



## johnnyyukon (Nov 8, 2013)

@Old Intern

Oh, and just for funsies, here's a GoPro video of the first dive my buddy took. I'm right next to him, but not really in it. sorta kind at the end.


----------



## Old Intern (Nov 20, 2012)

@johnnyyukon cool video, you have interesting life.

I think we want to break down every minute of life into functions as if we must be punching a clock. Your diving serves your sense of adventure and pushing limits? Whatever we do, all has content or items, people, etc, but the content is not the function. Or that's my way of looking at it. Anyone of any function usage, will think differently based on a level of experience, background information and other specifics of circumstance. I only think a function is a function because we have patterns and habits or preferences -priorities of what we search for and give weight to, in the general scheme of things, this makes a personality.

But I'm so glad you responded. -didn't mean to do overkill here.

One example of content vs function - might be somebody tinkering with cars.
One person built up knowledge from experiences that held rewards and broadening familiarity over time. This is not just a circumstance but a personal pattern. - And this experience could extend to more than cars.

Another person loves the mental analysis of physical causes, this may also be a pattern of something a person likes and exercises apart from the context of cars. They both are good mechanics but the process is different even if the content of a situation is the same.

The question isn't a sequence of mental actions, but what drives what. We have cross purposing in our brains where the same thing could be handled by a different department. But not every time we use memory is Si. Si is the preference not ability for recall - we all recall.

oookay, I've said enough now:tongue:


----------



## uncertain (May 26, 2012)

Old Intern said:


> Ne is not an interpretation, that would make it judgement, Ne is just seeing.


Why would it not be an interpretation when you decide to associate A with B in an analogy but not C?


----------



## Old Intern (Nov 20, 2012)

uncertain said:


> Why would it not be an interpretation when you decide to associate A with B in an analogy but not C?


Because its not something you do as a way to plan a speech - I mean anybody can do that and it could be other functions and reasons at play. Ne is just the way you are -you stay open. When something happens you think it could be for several reasons, you don't rush to judgement, you consider several angles on things. When you see a problem, you see solutions or causes (that might not be so obvious) before trying to work on it. *P functions* are a way of "seeing", just intake filters - not a list of activities. Analogy is a recognizable behavior but it is just anecdotal, "symptomatic behavior". Jung called perceiving functions irrational - all of them.

*My point is that perceiving functions don't DO anything - whichever ones you use. (*ni, si,ne,se*)
*
Usually N's know something about N only because they are told they are different at a young age. I'm not saying special, you could call it weird. It's only useless if you have this and yet put yourself into a life where obedience to existing structures is all that you have the guts to allow yourself. Ne is about seeing new - but you have to use other functions to build according to what you can see.

If you are going to only use an anecdotal one word description maybe imagination is a better word. Imagination is useless if your primary desire is to be safe and blameless. You can look at history and know imagination is not useless.


----------



## FlaviaGemina (May 3, 2012)

uncertain said:


> I think Ne makes random connection that don't really have a meaning, and most of them are hard to be put into practical use. Si seems to be similar to Ne in the way that Si also makes connection when you see something, but to the past. What do you think?
> 
> Ni has/create meaning. How do you Ni-users feel about brainstorming? I think having Ni makes it more difficult to brainstorm because your brain discriminates ideas that's not meaningful to you, or you simply start out with the direction into looking for meaningful ideas/ideas useful for a project and your brain can't think of anything outside of it.


As others have said, the functions in themselves don't have any meaning, but I think I can see where you're coming from:

Ne compares things that seem similar without questioning where that similarity comes from. Let's say an Ne-dom sees two things that look similar (by things I don't mean concrete objects, but 'memes' or whatever) and they'd see a connection.
Ni would only acknowledge a connection if those two things had the same history, were created for the same purpose etc. 
I'm not sure if this makes sense because I can't think of an example.


----------



## FlaviaGemina (May 3, 2012)

Kipposhi said:


> I'm Ne-dom. I think the "random connections" actually do have meaning, at least to me personally. When Ne really starts to develop, you get a sense of how everything really is connected, *how everything now depends on everything that has come before, and you get a sense of how things are going to shape up simply because the cause-and-effect has been repeated ad infinitum throughout history.* That sense of interconnection has always held some sort of inarticulable meaning to me, and I know how to navigate it.
> 
> .


This could totally be Ni.

Well... it depends. It's hard to split up your overall outlook into separate aspects, but I'd say INTP and ENTP might see these patterns and just accept that that's the way the world is. A typical XNTP reaction to things that are wrong in the world is "it's the same everywhere" (therefore it is normal and cannot be changed). An XNTJ might look at the same patterns, be aware how they have historically developed and decide that they are just _one way of looking at things_ and not a natural law that can't be changed.


----------



## Old Intern (Nov 20, 2012)

Ni users don't even know if Ni is real until they test it with common knowledge or public opinion. 

Just because some people on forums are stuck or have ADD and like to call it Ne doesn't mean there are not Ne users who use Ne to invent marketing systems or code from scratch, piecing together and re-purposing information from blogs and such.
But the Doing - whatever it would be, comes from judging functions.

If you *only* prize Ni it's because you think compliance to what already is - is your only option?

Nothing is ever created from nothing - so lateral thinking - re-purposing and re- combining to solve problems and put a new spin on something is the most direct form of creation - and starts with Ne.

Se can do expressive creation. Ni is more about discovery, Ne is about new spin or improvement - seeing something in a new context or from a fresh angle.


----------



## FlaviaGemina (May 3, 2012)

Old Intern said:


> Ni believes there is one right answer or one best way.


I believe no such thing. I believe the 'best way' (method) is relative, depending on what the purpose/ aim is.


----------



## Old Intern (Nov 20, 2012)

FlaviaGemina said:


> I believe no such thing. I believe the 'best way' (method) is relative, depending on what the purpose/ aim is.


The comment you quoted is (was intended) directed at the OP, not your above comment.
You were maybe empathizing with where OP is coming from. I'm still trying to answer the original question.


----------



## FlaviaGemina (May 3, 2012)

Old Intern said:


> The comment you quoted is (was intended) directed at the OP.


I know, but it's still not true that 'the one right way' is Ni. Ni is about perspectives. What you mean is probable Si-Te or Ni-Te or even Te-dom. I totally agree that I'd rather do things 'my' way than another person's way when it's about something that _I_ have to do or am in charge of. But I don't think that there's 'the one right way' in any absolute sense.


----------



## Ziggurat (Jun 12, 2010)

I'd argue that none of the functions have any meaning


----------



## Old Intern (Nov 20, 2012)

Ni is not about finding the truth? @FlaviaGemina* w*hen I speak of one right way, I'm not specifically identifying the attitude of a whole person - I'm describing the"job" of the function. Ni understands the universe to make use of building blocks (the blocks are discovered not invented). The person can choose to invent - with a combination of functions. Ne projects forward to expand or recombine for something new, Ne's job is to explore possibilities like a pioneer.

Ni explains, Ne projects?

Maybe confusion for OP is that Ti, does for me what Ni does for OP? Ti understands concepts. 

unlike Ni, Ti verbalizes (even if only internal dialog) and Ti is not holistic like N so I can understand one piece at a time. My "N" doesn't get needed to understand - Ti is doing that for me.

Ni understands (sees) essences and is tested by synchronizing with Te or Fe.
Ti understands concepts and mechanics, to build possibilities into reality - possibilities it got from Ne.


----------



## johnnyyukon (Nov 8, 2013)

Old Intern said:


> I think we want to break down every minute of life into functions as if we must be punching a clock. Your diving serves your sense of adventure and pushing limits? Whatever we do, all has content or items, people, etc, but the content is not the function. Or that's my way of looking at it. Anyone of any function usage, will think differently based on a level of experience, background information and other specifics of circumstance. I only think a function is a function because we have patterns and habits or preferences -priorities of what we search for and give weight to, in the general scheme of things, this makes a personality.
> 
> But I'm so glad you responded. -didn't mean to do overkill here.
> 
> ...


Ha, I hear ya. 

The diving thing was just the last, sort of intense time I was getting all these gut feelings but not sure where they were coming from until the post game Ti analysis.

And perhaps this is the wrong thread, and I don't expect a response, I'll probably just lurk, but I'm just most interested in intuition and instincts in the traditional sense, "gut feeling." I get them all the time, and have learned they are usually right (facts later reveal I was right) and I act on instincts much more than when I was younger, as I have learned to trust them. And how all that relates to my functions. And yes, it's FAR from an exact science. 

Damn Ne. tricky little devil (least to me).


----------



## FlaviaGemina (May 3, 2012)

Old Intern said:


> Ni is not about finding the truth? @FlaviaGemina* w*hen I speak of one right way, I'm not specifically identifying the attitude of a whole person - I'm describing the"job" of the function.* Ni understands the universe to make use of building blocks (the blocks are discovered not invented). The person can choose to invent - with a combination of functions. Ne projects forward to expand or recombine for something new, Ne's job is to explore possibilities like a pioneer.
> 
> Ni explains, Ne projects?
> *
> ...


The bolded part kinda makes sense in theory, but I don't always see it happening like that in practice. That's not to say that you are wrong, I'm just not often in an environment where I can actually see either Ne or Ni doms do this. 
Whenever people talk like this, it sounds like they are managers/innovators/philosophers who are in a job where it is considered normal to do this. You might very well be one of the above, so I'm not contradicting. Just wondering... E.g. my former ENTP boss definitely tries to explore possibilities, but he is constrained by _his_ nutty boss breathing down his back, who prevents him from exploring things.


----------



## Old Intern (Nov 20, 2012)

FlaviaGemina said:


> The bolded part kinda makes sense in theory, but I don't always see it happening like that in practice. That's not to say that you are wrong, I'm just not often in an environment where I can actually see either Ne or Ni doms do this.
> Whenever people talk like this, it sounds like they are managers/innovators/philosophers who are in a job where it is considered normal to do this. You might very well be one of the above, so I'm not contradicting. Just wondering... E.g. my former ENTP boss definitely tries to explore possibilities, but he is constrained by _his_ nutty boss breathing down his back, who prevents him from exploring things.


Yes, I think it is a battle for "N"s to operate the way they would like. "N" is a minority, and maybe the reason people complain about "S" on a forum like this? But I wonder if "S" emphasis or adaptation has been partly because this is what was needed in the industrial age and "now is our time - in the post information age?". It seems like the in-demand function for this age, or the current trend is Fi? - all the self expression online, hipster products and farmer's markets.

One thing Ne users have to figure out and accept is that keeping some things the same is necessary. 

It has been argued on this forum if fictional character Gregory House was INTJ or ENTP with low Fe. I could see it either way. But if he was ENTP, he was in the ENTP "sweet spot" (golf metaphor). He got to have an endless supply of puzzles to solve and was allowed to use unconventional methods, - never or almost never a dull routine. But if he could be a real person, he would have been through a lot to earn that place. One way to look at that as a model for Ne is that he has a track record and specialization that earns him the boss who cuts him some slack in his methods. 

This is where Fe could come in - even if he doesn't like to play nice with others - (just, as a fictional case in point or allegory) socially, fictional ENTP Dr House made a deal, he has a track record - somebody got results enough for this to be social collateral. The boss in his case, serves his own purposes, she holds the lid on his extremes and maintains the constraints that allow his "freedoms".

Not saying INTJ is better or worse match - just using an example of all functions earning the right for an ENTP to operate from his best self. The need to explore provides benefits, but others may not see it, if you are not willing to show usefulness on a basis of what others will want or believe.

The book "Onward" written by the founder of Starbucks, could be colored by PR people, but if this is the voice of the author coming through - This Guy is ENFP. He had a vision for a new or re-purposed - re-positioned spin on a coffee shop. This wasn't pure experience of better coffee, it was a spin on how people think about that coffee break. When he came back to being the CEO after leaving, his "second act" was to re-position how people felt about Starbucks, and create a new hip or up-to date culture around his product. You have to have a vision for this, you see that in his book.


----------



## Goliath (Aug 28, 2014)

I think Ni is excellent at formulating future goals- plans, where one ought to be in 5 years or 10 years etc. I think Ne brainstorms potentials that Ni may have overlooked, and can absolutely add onto that larger goal. Ni could push Ne to achieve one of their ideas by making it into a personalized goal, and Ne could broaden Ni's often closed-minded mindset (if the Ni is not too stubborn.) So they are both equally as necessary in a business setting, I would say.


----------



## Old Intern (Nov 20, 2012)

Goliath said:


> I think Ni is excellent at formulating future goals- plans, where one ought to be in 5 years or 10 years etc. I think Ne brainstorms potentials that Ni may have overlooked, and can absolutely add onto that larger goal. Ni could push Ne to achieve one of their ideas by making it into a personalized goal, and Ne could broaden Ni's often closed-minded mindset (if the Ni is not too stubborn.) So they are both equally as necessary in a business setting, I would say.


Yes - the five year goal, to be on track, safe or blameless, popular or powerful or right, and maybe make something good happen. 

Ne is a shot-gun approach with the aim of change or new and improved. Perceivers are adapters - we need risk because with no possibility of failure there is no creative success. No possible failure means you are doing something already proven (not new). If I had steps that were a guarantee, it would be like just going through the motions, boring. Evolving as you go is what Ne users are made for.

You could have the Ni leader who needs an Ne to Launch projects, or you could have an Ne leader who needs the Ni to manage the game plan after major objectives have been outlined.

Most start-ups are not ENTJ's - ENTJ's are in their "sweet spot" when something already exists, and they can manage for efficiency. It needs to already be big enough to benefit from the streamlining the ENTJ will bring to the table.

I don't think an Ni could push me to anything. They might outline some constraints we would need to get along. Or they can pay me to do a project they don't have experience or ideas for. You can know the outcome you want, but need a creative way to get there. Give me the project you need an inventive approach for, tell me what YOU want out of the deal, if I commit to it, I'm motivated. - it wouldn't hurt to give me a timeline and a fake deadline - or build some cushion in for me. Still hard for me to do that for myself, better than I was when I was young.

One INTJ thought, the INTJ start-up would likely be fueled with Fi.
Ne is opportunistic, (the idea seems to present itself) not personal.


----------



## Lord Bullingdon (Aug 9, 2014)

FlaviaGemina said:


> This could totally be Ni.
> 
> Well... it depends. It's hard to split up your overall outlook into separate aspects, but I'd say INTP and ENTP might see these patterns and just accept that that's the way the world is. A typical XNTP reaction to things that are wrong in the world is "it's the same everywhere" (therefore it is normal and cannot be changed). An XNTJ might look at the same patterns, be aware how they have historically developed and decide that they are just _one way of looking at things_ and not a natural law that can't be changed.


Could totally be, but I'd lying if I said I was Ni-dom. Or a Te-user for that matter. 

I wouldn't say I particularly take either of the above attitudes, myself. At least, not as a conscious philosophy. I just see how it goes and know what to do with it.


----------



## FlaviaGemina (May 3, 2012)

Old Intern said:


> Yes - the five year goal, to be on track, safe or blameless, popular or powerful or right, and maybe make something good happen.
> 
> Ne is a shot-gun approach with the aim of change or new and improved. Perceivers are adapters - we need risk because with no possibility of failure there is no creative success. No possible failure means you are doing something already proven (not new). If I had steps that were a guarantee, it would be like just going through the motions, boring. Evolving as you go is what Ne users are made for.
> 
> ...


I also depends on the environment, though. If I was in a business environment, I think I would be more 'reckless', but because I work in education, I can't afford to experiment with my students' future. 
On the other hand, I've often had the 'tough' cases dumped onto me, the kids that nobody else wants and I've had more success with them than some colleagues (they weren't 'tough' as in delinquents, just somebody nobody else can be bothered with). And sometimes I did actually develop a 'new' approach, such as 'Let's not talk about the kid with ASD is _different_, but how they are _similar_'. So I'd point out things to the kid that they and me (and actually everybody else) have in common and we'd develop a bond and study together and the kid's results would improve. Of course, this isn't a completely novel approach in any absolute sense, but it was new in this environment. There was definitely Fi in this, but in general, my 'specialism' is providing what nobody else does. I'm actually very good at sensing what is lacking and providing that, so I can always find a little niche.


----------



## The_Wanderer (Jun 13, 2013)

Perceiving/irrational functions by themselves don't have _meaning_​.


----------



## Old Intern (Nov 20, 2012)

Okay, mayyybe I'm starting to get what was meant in OP about the intended meaning of meaning. 

In my case, meaning - all rests on Ti. because my reasoning and thinking is all an internal process that I'm aware of. My thoughts, what makes sense to me, my understanding of what I want and what is expected or wanted by other people - most of my meaning is analytic. It's not that I don't see, hear or taste - I'm not looking for a sensing or intuiting feedback about closure or satisfaction the way other types might?

@FlaviaGemina what you do with Ni, I would be doing with testing of questions or poking, doing some process of elimination, and analyzing what happens - watching cause and effect and making conclusions with Ti. You sense and then research, do and watch and measure. I agree that you should not experiment on students. Ni wants to not make mistakes - your work is a fit for you.

One clear example of using Ne - Ti would be responding to a computer glitch, or writing web code from scratch. I look at results, analyze how the parts make up the whole - what makes up cause and effect is all analytic - all theory. If when I take action I don't get the results expected, Ne sees three or four reasons for how a browser or software or hardware might be interpreting my input. I set up a test or control to eliminate where the problem is not (Ti), watching the response, Ne asks new questions (sensing possibilities - Ne role, is more like questions than answers but multiple answers = the useful question, Ti will fine tune). Ne - Ti is back and forth like tennis until you get your working answer, solution, closure - but this happens quickly because Ne is automatic. 

Using above example, the snake is like a rope leads to developing a theory. If this line of code works to make this thing, I can use it to do this other thing.

Also, @FlaviaGemina I'm not saying you should be anything different, or more reckless.
This is not a better or worse thing, it is how Ne - Ti, and Ni - Te are like reverse engineering to each other. You start with a different premise - ultimate truth as mission critical or ideal and Ni helps you align to this. I start with my ability to comprehend (seeing my own internal workings of Ti) as a bargaining chip for making meaning or deals, (which become something real), Fe being the external reality to gauge from. Ne is more like the truck that keeps dropping off deliveries on my doorstep. So yeah, in that way Ne is not a tool to find meaning.


----------



## Cataclysm (Mar 16, 2015)

What do you mean by _meaning_? To me, nothing has any meaning until you attach your own, subjective value onto it.


----------

