On Ni

[Expat]

I wrote this definition on Ni in a discussion in the wiki; Jonathan thought it was very good, so here it goes --

The early socionists, including Augusta herself and Stratiyevskaya, emphasized a lot (too much imo) the "intuition of time" aspect of Ni. I see Ni as the inclination to wander off into your own internal imaginary world, going deep into it and following it for a while, rather than jump between different ones "on the surface", which is more Ne. That imaginary world is often reflections on the past and on the future, and what connects them; and also a consistent imaginary word such as a poem or a novel. The INTp Gore Vidal has described himself, in his youth, as always wandering off into his own imagination and "automatically" creating a whole novel, which he then "just" had to put into paper. That is also Ni. So all of the definitions you mentioned are aspects of Ni imo. But I grant you, again, that the early definitions emphasized too much the "time" thingy, which makes no sense with the INFp "romantic and dreamer" aspect.

Adding to that --

A Ni dominant has no problem with remaining a long, long time in Ni mode; for them, far better to do that than worry about pointless, changing, "factual" data (INFp) or about one's role in the context of social interactions emotionally (INTp).

A Ni HA type sees the value of doing that, but keeps wondering whether they're not doing it too much and if they should not get going.

A Ni dual-seeking type likes people who do that because they could restrain a bit their own impulsiveness by thinking of the consequences.

A Ni PoLR type sees no pont to that at all. Wander off in your thoughts? Fine, but only if to solve the problem that's in front of you -- all the rest is self-indulging in pointless and lazy "daydreaming". Ni my ass! Get to work!

[meatburger]

Ni sounds like a pretty fun function really. I can relate to what you said that Ne imaginations are perhaps more fleeting. I tend to drift off into my imaginations quite often but i will imagine a really short situation. For example i will imagine myself handling a social situation in a different way (being funny/smooth etc). It only seems to last for a short time though.

So if you have Ni in your ego block can you sit and just slip into your internal story when your feeling bored?

What would be the difference between Ni accepting / Ni creating?

[Expat]

Ni sounds like a pretty fun function really. I can relate to what you said that Ne imaginations are perhaps more fleeting. I tend to drift off into my imaginations quite often but i will imagine a really short situation. For example i will imagine myself handling a social situation in a different way (being funny/smooth etc). It only seems to last for a short time though.

As ENFp, you can use Ni very easily, but as you said, for short times -- for longer times it's boring to you.

So if you have Ni in your ego block can you sit and just slip into your internal story when your feeling bored?

Yes, but if you are Ni dominant, you'll want to do that even if not bored.

What would be the difference between Ni accepting / Ni creating?

The difference is that getting into Ni-mode, for ENTjs and ENFjs, is not really the most natural state -- it's a state to sort of "gather information" to act with Te or Fe. An ENTj or ENFj who wanders off too long in Ni mode begins to feel useless and restless.

[tcaudilllg]

That's why I prefer to call sequential progression: "this happens, followed by this, followed by this...." An abstract story, in other words.

Time is sequential progression, but sequential progression is not "time", at least in the physical sense.

[redbaron]

Adding to that --

A Ni dominant has no problem with remaining a long, long time in Ni mode; for them, far better to do that than worry about pointless, changing, "factual" data (INFp) or about one's role in the context of social interactions emotionally (INTp).

A Ni HA type sees the value of doing that, but keeps wondering whether they're not doing it too much and if they should not get going.

A Ni dual-seeking type likes people who do that because they could restrain a bit their own impulsiveness by thinking of the consequences.

A Ni PoLR type sees no pont to that at all. Wander off in your thoughts? Fine, but only if to solve the problem that's in front of you -- all the rest is self-indulging in pointless and lazy "daydreaming". Ni my ass! Get to work!

I do it but I am always thinking that I do it too much and I need to pull myself out of it (which is relatively easy to do) with distractions from the physical world. I don't spend very much time in Ni mode each time I'm there. But these imaginings do pop up often. What I mean is, many times throughout the day but not for long periods of time each occasion.

[KSpin]

I'm always daydreaming... and can be surprised by people easily when I'm doing it.

Sometimes I can be talking to someone, and then focus on something behind them and seem to be staring, and just stop mid-sentence. I have to force myself to continue.

[Blaze]

Adding to that --

A Ni dominant has no problem with remaining a long, long time in Ni mode; for them, far better to do that than worry about pointless, changing, "factual" data (INFp) or about one's role in the context of social interactions emotionally (INTp).

A Ni HA type sees the value of doing that, but keeps wondering whether they're not doing it too much and if they should not get going.

A Ni dual-seeking type likes people who do that because they could restrain a bit their own impulsiveness by thinking of the consequences.

A Ni PoLR type sees no pont to that at all. Wander off in your thoughts? Fine, but only if to solve the problem that's in front of you -- all the rest is self-indulging in pointless and lazy "daydreaming". Ni my ass! Get to work!

I do it but I am always thinking that I do it too much and I need to pull myself out of it (which is relatively easy to do) with distractions from the physical world. I don't spend very much time in Ni mode each time I'm there. But these imaginings do pop up often. What I mean is, many times throughout the day but not for long periods of time each occasion.

my infp man says that he does do this Ni thing as a natural course, but when young realized that he had to take actions to realize dreams, otherwise he would not accomplish anything. so redbaron it sounds like you are saying the same thing. i think it's Ni with a strong Se dual seeking.

[Gilly]

That's why I prefer to call sequential progression: "this happens, followed by this, followed by this...." An abstract story, in other words.

Time is sequential progression, but sequential progression is not "time", at least in the physical sense.

Not bad at all.

I use Ni in the "practical" sense, as a kind of warning system: "If I do this, then this will probably happen...I should reconsider." But not really in the daydreaming sense; I go off in my head sometimes, but not so much in the way described here.

[PotatoSpirit]

I'll take a pink triangle over a white one every time.


Very nice description, it helped me a lot with a few difficult typings.

[Dioklecian]

That description of Ni is very important. It covers one of the most important aspects of Ni. I am still surprised that other people can't automatically dream whatever they want.

However this description of Ni depicts it as purely idle, but that is not true. Ni has many other capabilities, as a primary function anyways.

[implied]

I wrote this definition on Ni in a discussion in the wiki; Jonathan thought it was very good, so here it goes --

The early socionists, including Augusta herself and Stratiyevskaya, emphasized a lot (too much imo) the "intuition of time" aspect of Ni. I see Ni as the inclination to wander off into your own internal imaginary world, going deep into it and following it for a while, rather than jump between different ones "on the surface", which is more Ne. That imaginary world is often reflections on the past and on the future, and what connects them; and also a consistent imaginary word such as a poem or a novel. The INTp Gore Vidal has described himself, in his youth, as always wandering off into his own imagination and "automatically" creating a whole novel, which he then "just" had to put into paper. That is also Ni. So all of the definitions you mentioned are aspects of Ni imo. But I grant you, again, that the early definitions emphasized too much the "time" thingy, which makes no sense with the INFp "romantic and dreamer" aspect.

Adding to that --

A Ni dominant has no problem with remaining a long, long time in Ni mode; for them, far better to do that than worry about pointless, changing, "factual" data (INFp) or about one's role in the context of social interactions emotionally (INTp).

A Ni HA type sees the value of doing that, but keeps wondering whether they're not doing it too much and if they should not get going.

A Ni dual-seeking type likes people who do that because they could restrain a bit their own impulsiveness by thinking of the consequences.

A Ni PoLR type sees no pont to that at all. Wander off in your thoughts? Fine, but only if to solve the problem that's in front of you -- all the rest is self-indulging in pointless and lazy "daydreaming". Ni my ass! Get to work!

this is interesting to me. i recently got into an argument with a friend of mine who i am fairly sure is intuitive. possibly as well.

we were at a convenience store and i picked up a $1.99 bagel because i wanted one bagel with cream cheese and a soda. he then went into detail about why my bagel purchase was a sorry idea because i could just get a pack of 12 bagels and some cream cheese at the store for a comparable price and save money that way. but i only wanted one bagel with cream cheese and honestly i rarely eat bagels in the first place. the likelihood that the 12 pack bagels would have spoiled and that the cream cheese would have gone rancid before i even ate the other 12 made buying bagels in bulk seem ridiculous to me. he continued to argue with me about how that $1.99 bagel + soda purchase multiplied by 3 (3xday), by 30 days out of the month, by 12 months a year, was costing me a ton of money. he completely ignored the fact that eating bagels and sodas 3 times a day is incredibly unlikely and something i'd never do. (i think heathiep would agree that bagels and sodas for a year would be a completely unhealthy and unbalanced diet.)


completely ignoring the health factor involved, a budget of 3.24 (+ tax)/meal is actually around the $10/day budget that more "thrifty" shoppers like to maintain. this actually seemed really unreasonable to me and i was actually bothered that my single bagel purchase was "such a big deal."

[Dioklecian]

That's hilarious implied. It seems that your friend places a higher priority on money that on his needs. That is, he will eat something if it is cheap rather then go and buy that something that he wants to eat regardless of price.

The whole "sales" culture is based on this kind of thinking in my opinion. It must be either Ni or Te.

[implied]

That's hilarious implied. It seems that your friend places a higher priority on money that on his needs. That is, he will eat something if it is cheap rather then go and buy that something that he wants to eat regardless of price.

The whole "sales" culture is based on this kind of thinking in my opinion. It must be either Ni or Te.

i agree. i think there should be a fair balance between money & needs. my mother does the same sort of "buying in bulk" with products that you really shouldn't buy in bulk in the first place, products that go rancid quickly in the summertime. my dad criticizes her about this because it winds up being a waste of money in the long run as well. it does seem like or , but it confuses me nevertheless. it could be some sort of subconscious form of this. i really have no clue. to me, there are more factors than just cheapness. for instance, cubans are said to have access to free food, but who really wants to eat the "free food" in cuba when it's of such a poor quality that it isn't even worth eating or sustaining a diet on? same thing goes for free healthcare, sometimes, although there are some instances in other countries where this seems to work well.


i'm reminded of this.

[Minde]

I must have lots of Ni. How does that work?

[Transigent]

Wow! Expat, this is really the best description of I have seen.

I must have lots of Ni. How does that work?

Do you really think that you are INFj???!?!?!?

From here it is clear you be INFp dear. You can get a guess just by the way you title your posts. LOL But, really, it is apparent from other reasons also. (Spiritual life, etc.)

But really, great description of if it gets converts.

Expat is my new god.

[Creepy-Diana]

.

[Dioklecian]

Expat is my new god.

Yeah...

Without wanting to dumpen this enthusiasm, I should point out, as a Ni dominat, that to see your inner vision is not a function in the Jungian sense. A function has to do just that: provide you a function in the world and society, direct your life.

Daydreaming is not a profession! (unfortunately

[Minde]

Do you really think that you are INFj???!?!?!?

From here it is clear you be INFp dear. You can get a guess just by the way you title your posts. LOL But, really, it is apparent from other reasons also. (Spiritual life, etc.)

Ooh, this is exciting. The first real challenge to my type.

... The way I title my posts? O.o

[tcaudilllg]

This doesn't make sense to me. Problem resolution is what I do.

*If solving the problem does not contribute to my development or to the development of others, then it's insignificant.
*I can't solve your problems for you. The most I can do is coach/guide you through the process.
*I require feedback so that I can assess and correct my performance.

Koshi: that's exactly why I'm here, too.

[Jonathan]

Noo Transigent, Minde is Fi! And if you have strong Ne you have decent Ni as well.

What's interesting here is...assuming that Minde is right that she's FiNe...might FiNe ever appear to use something like Ni that is really FiNe?
That is to say, might using acc-Fi in a way that focuses Ne a bit result in a sort of imagination activity that's different from Ni imagination? And if so, how would one tell the difference?

Similarly, suppose one dwells for awhile in an imagination of a very appealing sensory world....would that be some sort of mixture of Ni and Si? would imagining some sort of internal structures be combining Ni and Ti? I suppose considering Tcaud's ideas one might consider these cases of Si or Ti exertion (or maybe it's the other way around....Ni exertion)?

[Dioklecian]

I don't think vidal is INTP IMO, his father was INTP prob.

I think that he is ENTJ. (compare to Lord Conrad Black).

[Expat]

I don't think vidal is INTP IMO, his father was INTP prob.

I think that he is ENTJ. (compare to Lord Conrad Black).

I think you've got it totally backwards. Lord Black is much more likely ESTp, Gene Vidal was ESTj, and Vidal is INTp.

EDIT: ENFj is another possibility for Black. But I find it less likely due to his "hobby" of writing biographies - first of FDR, now of Nixon - which strikes me as a typical use of Te as 8th function.

[Expat]

Noo Transigent, Minde is Fi! And if you have strong Ne you have decent Ni as well.

What's interesting here is...assuming that Minde is right that she's FiNe...might FiNe ever appear to use something like Ni that is really FiNe?
That is to say, might using acc-Fi in a way that focuses Ne a bit result in a sort of imagination activity that's different from Ni imagination? And if so, how would one tell the difference?

Similarly, suppose one dwells for awhile in an imagination of a very appealing sensory world....would that be some sort of mixture of Ni and Si? would imagining some sort of internal structures be combining Ni and Ti? I suppose considering Tcaud's ideas one might consider these cases of Si or Ti exertion (or maybe it's the other way around....Ni exertion)?

You're making it much more complicated than it is.

An INFj can use Ni quite easily, just like an ENFj can use Ne easily. But Fi remains the INFj's main way of looking at the world.

[Hashish]

Thanks a lot for that description. I didn't actually understand what my dominant function meant but now it's totally clear to me. BTW I'm INTp and my sister is INFp and we've got the same problem. When we read a book we often suddenly realize that we've already read few pages thinking about completely something else. That must be Ni's fault!

[Expat]

Without wanting to dumpen this enthusiasm, I should point out, as a Ni dominat, that to see your inner vision is not a function in the Jungian sense. A function has to do just that: provide you a function in the world and society, direct your life.

That has ZERO to do with the meaning of "function" in socionics.

Daydreaming is not a profession! (unfortunately

I think authors and perhaps composers might disagree.

I use Ni in the "practical" sense, as a kind of warning system: "If I do this, then this will probably happen...I should reconsider." But not really in the daydreaming sense; I go off in my head sometimes, but not so much in the way described here.

Yes, what I described was really more for strong Ni dominants. What you have described is not going that deep into Ni mode.

[implied]

Daydreaming is not a profession! (unfortunately

I think authors and perhaps composers might disagree.

agree. it can be a rather good profession if you're good enough at it (think of the money made from harry potter books.)

[Expat]

@Jonathan: you seem to be attempting to reduce a person's mental processes to their ego. So if Minde as INFj identifies with a description of , rather than see that as a natural use of the 8th function, you try to explain it as "maybe not , maybe and that looks like ".

Know this: that path leads to a swamp of confusion. The beauty of model A - which is still rather complex, is it not - is that it manages to deconstruct the human psyche in a model of functions of varying degrees of preference of use, which is what determines how people interact. What you are doing is to try to dump all functions onto the ego, thereby making the ego so complicated as to make any intertype relationship analysis impractical.

I also use and . Why don't you try to explain my use of as "maybe not , maybe a combination of and and, hmm, that just look like ?" Good luck with that.

[KSpin]

When we read a book we often suddenly realise that we've already read a few pages thinking about something completely different.

I do that too.

[Expat]

agree. it can be a rather good profession if you're good enough at it (think of the money made from harry potter books.)

Aha, great example! But of course she also had to actually write down her thoughts on paper, which some may never get to.

[Transigent]

Noo Transigent, Minde is Fi! And if you have strong Ne you have decent Ni as well.

I mean, who can be sure of these things, but I am as sure as I can be. I dunno, I kinda got a 6th sense for some Betas, has to do with and . Minde is definitely an INFp, but I have already failed to convince one INFp of their INFpenis, so I doubt I could ever succeed. (Even though UDP is kinda different INFp wise, the evidence is still there.)

Hell, there are some folks on here, who have been changing types and such, being very confused, when it is kinda clear to me what types they are. There are certain things that people say and do that have importance in considering type, and some other things that are insignificant. Trying to determine which things is...well, it is pretty damn hard to do, but crucial when you try to pick out types.

And you gotta do it for all the types. Like, I am better at picking Beta-S types out then Alpha-S types, and I was complete shit at finding INTj's until a while ago.

Of course, nobody is as serious about this stuff as I sound here, but it just comes to you if your interested and interact with lots of people.

Without wanting to dumpen this enthusiasm, I should point out, as a Ni dominat, that to see your inner vision is not a function in the Jungian sense. A function has to do just that: provide you a function in the world and society, direct your life.

Are you so stupid as to think that you are some kind of INxp??????!?!?!?

You ain't. I think your dual seeking could be intuition, so you mistake an obsession with what you actually are. If you are intuitive, then you must be really stupid in any case.

If I remember correctly, I think we determined you were ESFp. I haven't ever seen any reason to change this diagnosis.

[meatburger]

When we read a book we often suddenly realise that we've already read a few pages thinking about something completely different.

I do that too.

Yeah so do i! In fact i did it about an hour ago reading my uni readings. They got a little boring so i started thinking about something else lol. Is that totally Ni? If it is i wonder what the difference between you and i doing it is? Ni is conscious for you so do you realise your not reading it but dont mind? I dont even register im not reading it i totally forget what im doing. Then i go oh shit now ive got to back track.

[FDG]

That's just a concentration problem. Every type for example, when being intensely infatuated, will think about the object of the infatuation instead of studying - even strong sensing types.

[meatburger]

That's just a concentration problem. Every type for example, when being intensely infatuated, will think about the object of the infatuation instead of studying - even strong sensing types.

Yeah that was what i was thinking. I think it is just about concentration in the above situation. I wasn't daydreaming per say i was just thinking about something else. Wikipedia seems to make a distinction between mind-wandering and daydreaming.

Heres another example. I was just watching this korean movie called the host and "boom" this question came into my head and i started thinking about it. The question was like "so whats the difference between subconscious Ni and conscious Ni?" Daydreaming intrudes upon my life i never actually actively persue it but i suspect its the same for Ni dominants aswell. I suppose this is because it is an introverted function?

[Minde]

@ Transigent

(so as not to derail)

[anndelise]

http://www.webmd.com/balance/feature...t-such-bad-rap

I don't see Ni as the "daydreaming function".
I see it as a thing that humans do.
Each type, however, may do it differently, or have different focuses within it.
I don't see Ni's location within model A as being a decent explanation of these differences.

[Jarno]

daydreaming is probably an Introvert thing.

[Expat]

I don't see Ni as the "daydreaming function".
I see it as a thing that humans do.

daydreaming is probably an Introvert thing.

Anyone else agrees? Is building up whole consistent stories (like Gore Vidal or JK Rowling) in your minds, spontaneously, just what humans or introverts (no, I am not implying that introverts aren't human) do? Anyone else agrees?

[KSpin]

Ni may affect what you day-dream about, then?

I usually go off into my head about what would happen had this happened in the story... and then realise that I've been reading the words but they haven't been registering. Like I'm blocking out a voice in my own head.

Sometimes I wonder whether I speak the words I'm reading in my head, or whether their meaning just comes to me. If you get what I mean.

[Park]

Anyone else agrees?

I guess I would agree as I do relate. And I will second FDG's comment.

[Park]

"When my time comes, forget the wrong that I've done.
Help me leave behind some reasons to be missed."

That's strong. Where does that quote come from?