Comparing +Ne/-Ni and -Ne/+Ni

[Hitta]

The way I see +Ne/-Ni is like this. Its like lacking the ability to stay on task. +Ne/-Ni constantly has to be stimulated differently. Its looking for anything new and original. It has to hard time doing repetition. In fact, it hates repetition(a lot of this goes in with how the other functions fit into model A also, like lacking the ability to complete is +Se unvalued). The +Ne side of it likes to see things from all the different possible aspects. It doesn't like to be stuck in one mode. It likes to vary to the extreme degree. Because it varies so much, +Ne/-Ni also lacks the ability to take the careful care of their bodies(-Si lacking). Because +Ne/-Ni strives to be original, it hates conformity. This means that -Se will have to be valued. +Ne/-Ni types have a strong need to not follow, but to be in the limelight. They want to be looked at as a non-follower, as a rebel. This would mean that -Se would be a unconscious motivator, or an agenda. So an +Ne/-Nis need to be original happens because they have an agenda to rebel. Because +Ne/-Ni sees all the possibilities in things, they tend to see all the possible scenarios for disaster too, like seizing to exist. This would make a +Ne/-Ni type have a sense of anxiety about things, and a fear of death. They often have existential anxiety.

Now this is the way I see -Ne/+Ni. Its similar to desiring the ability to stay on task. It doesn't like to be stimulated differently, it likes routine and consistency. It prefers normalcy. It prefers repetition. The -Ne side means that it views things in either a right or wrong way. ( I remember arguing with a INTp one time about whether a baseball can be neither fair or foul. The INTp said that it had to be either fair or foul, it couldn't be either or neither. I said that he was wrong because he was unable to see the infinite about of relative planes that one could view the situation from, and also the idea of whether or not we are subjective to the true absolute reality. We debated for the longest. And while I thought he was wrong, he was right in the context in which he was thinking it of probably. But INTps lack the ability to change contexts. They do not know how to do this.) Because -Ne/+Ni is good at tedious repetitive tasks, they will have to value +Se. +Se means that they are able to finish things and they prefer consistency. Because of this they lack initiative to start new things, this because they do not like to leave the old things behind. -Si is also valued, so they will have the ability to closely take care of their hygiene, in other words, take care of their bodies tedious tasks. Also, because -Ne/+Ne types see things in black and white, and they believe they have a definite answer for things, they tend to have a sense of security. They do not tend to be afraid of anything.

[reyn_til_runa]

of course it has to be either fair or foul, but it's not because i cannot view the situation outside a particular context. it has to do with deconstructing the problem to the point of there being miniscule parts comprising the path of the ball from the moment it's hit off the bat, traveling inside the park, and crossing into foul territory. there is a chain of events which determines the exact course of the ball. yes the ball could perhaps land on the foul line, but that's not too different from standing on a "welcome to indiana" sign and believing you're actually between states.

[Kristiina]

+Ni types can't prefer repetition, because this would conflict the generally accepted claim that sensors are better at repetitive tasks. Mhh... Although ESxp should hate repetitive tasks because he's EP. I do prefer knowing exactly what will happen and I hate unexpected events.

And I thought INFps were supposed to have the fear of death, but they are +Ni type. And existential anxiety is very INFp.

And I see way too many possible scenarios for disaster. Same with the ISFjs and ENFps, but I am +Ni and they are -Ni types.

[Hitta]

+Ni types can't prefer repetition, because this would conflict the generally accepted claim that sensors are better at repetitive tasks. Mhh... Although ESxp should hate repetitive tasks because he's EP. I do prefer knowing exactly what will happen and I hate unexpected events.

And I thought INFps were supposed to have the fear of death, but they are +Ni type. And existential anxiety is very INFp.

And I see way too many possible scenarios for disaster. Same with the ISFjs and ENFps, but I am +Ni and they are -Ni types.

Well I don't like to look at types as being "sensors" or "intuitive". I simply believe that all types value both intuition and sensing, one of them is a natural function and the other being an agenda. INFp is -Ni/+Ne. ENFp is +Ni/-Ne. -Ni is fear because of the possibilities. ENFps have a sense of safety about them. INFp and ENFjs use the same intuition that ENTps and INTjs use, the difference being that beta NFs are more of an intuitive possibilities with distancing and sadness-like ethical motives, and alpha NTs use it with anarchical logic. ENTps INTjs INFps ENFjs all see the possibilities, they see multiple viewpoints. The majority of the time +Ne/-Ni likes to be seen as original, or out there. They like people to think of them as different. Existential anxiety connects to these 4 types. Funny thing is, I see a similar VI representation between types that share functions like this. You can actually look at an ENTp and INFp and see the similarity.

[strrrng]

The way I see +Ne/-Ni is like this. Its like lacking the ability to stay on task. +Ne/-Ni constantly has to be stimulated differently. Its looking for anything new and original. It has to hard time doing repetition. In fact, it hates repetition(a lot of this goes in with how the other functions fit into model A also, like lacking the ability to complete is +Se unvalued). The +Ne side of it likes to see things from all the different possible aspects. It doesn't like to be stuck in one mode. It likes to vary to the extreme degree. Because it varies so much, +Ne/-Ni also lacks the ability to take the careful care of their bodies(-Si lacking). Because +Ne/-Ni strives to be original, it hates conformity. This means that -Se will have to be valued. +Ne/-Ni types have a strong need to not follow, but to be in the limelight. They want to be looked at as a non-follower, as a rebel. This would mean that -Se would be a unconscious motivator, or an agenda. So an +Ne/-Nis need to be original happens because they have an agenda to rebel. Because +Ne/-Ni sees all the possibilities in things,they tend to see all the possible scenarios for disaster too, like seizing to exist . This would make a +Ne/-Ni type have a sense of anxiety about things, and a fear of death. They often have existential anxiety.

the first post of yours to ever make sense lol. I'm +Ne/-Ni and I like variety, which will lead me to do things impulsively, and when I'm on the comp., I'll have many things going on at once....I hate the rote repetition also. But I wouldn't classify myself with all the ADD people. And also, my dad is ENFp...-Ne/+Ni and he is major ADD, but I think that's just ENP...

the last bolded part was very accurate.

[tcaudilllg]

Hitta, I get the impression you don't study people who you don't like or disagree with, or at the very least you don't study them equally. If you did you'd know that these political connotations ("stand out, be different") have no place. Consider, an INFp who just so happens to prefer a lifestyle that seems "shocking" or rebellious in the current cultural context may not be that original or even independent; yet another INFp chooses to avoid the cultural expectations of rebellion and rebell in some way that is so foreign and new as almost not to quality as "rebellion" at all. The mere plausibility of these different personalities harms the credibility of your type theories. They exist, and yet, your theory does not account for them explicitly or implicitly.

I simply believe that all types value both intuition and sensing, one of them is a natural function and the other being an agenda.

A man who believes the world is flat when it is indeed round, is a fool. Belief should correspond to reality.

I would argue with you over this, but it'd just be a relativistic hoolybodgen that would lend to nothing. Believe what you want, but leave belief behind if it interferes with the integrity of your theory.

I can promise you you'll be criticized until you do.

[aka-kitsune]

I would argue with you over this, but it'd just be a relativistic hoolybodgen that would lend to nothing.

+1 for spontaneous word!

[Hitta]

Hitta, I get the impression you don't study people who you don't like or disagree with, or at the very least you don't study them equally. If you did you'd know that these political connotations ("stand out, be different") have no place. Consider, an INFp who just so happens to prefer a lifestyle that seems "shocking" or rebellious in the current cultural context may not be that original or even independent; yet another INFp chooses to avoid the cultural expectations of rebellion and rebell in some way that is so foreign and new as almost not to quality as "rebellion" at all. The mere plausibility of these different personalities harms the credibility of your type theories. They exist, and yet, your theory does not account for them explicitly or implicitly.

I simply believe that all types value both intuition and sensing, one of them is a natural function and the other being an agenda.

A man who believes the world is flat when it is indeed round, is a fool. Belief should correspond to reality.

I would argue with you over this, but it'd just be a relativistic hoolybodgen that would lend to nothing. Believe what you want, but leave belief behind if it interferes with the integrity of your theory.

I can promise you you'll be criticized until you do.

Everything is belief. All things that you see is just belief in them. All facts you think you know, you do not. Nothing can and will every be truly proven unless we can prove an absolute context, which is most probably impossible. Just because a type attempts to be original doesn't make them original, don't be confused by that. INTp in their quest to reach absolute normalcy often at times appear and are original by accident. There is a strong difference between needing to be something, and actually doing it. I'd even argue that originality doesn't exist, that everything is based on something else.

[strrrng]

Everything is belief. All things that you see is just belief in them. All facts you think you know, you do not. Nothing can and will every be truly proven unless we can prove an absolute context, which is most probably impossible. Just because a type attempts to be original doesn't make them original, don't be confused by that. INTp in their quest to reach absolute normalcy often at times appear and are original by accident. There is a strong difference between needing to be something, and actually doing it. I'd even argue that originality doesn't exist, that everything is based on something else.

good post. I didn't much care for the beginning generalization, but liked your supports. You mentioned an absolute context, which I liked, because context is one of the single most important things when describing reality. And you could argue that originality doesn't exist, but even if everything was based on something else, originality would still be there, like an outlier on a scatterplot or something.

[tcaudilllg]

Everything is belief. All things that you see is just belief in them. All facts you think you know, you do not. Nothing can and will every be truly proven unless we can prove an absolute context, which is most probably impossible. Just because a type attempts to be original doesn't make them original, don't be confused by that. INTp in their quest to reach absolute normalcy often at times appear and are original by accident. There is a strong difference between needing to be something, and actually doing it. I'd even argue that originality doesn't exist, that everything is based on something else.

[/quote]

"All facts you think you know, you do not"? Tell that to a type....

"Nothing can and will every be truly proven unless we can prove an absolute context, which is most probably impossible." You're invoking this whenever you use function 8.

Interesting thought: I suspect that Einstein abandoned his relativism near the end of his life to commit to completely objective relational patterns. I think you're projecting your distaste for authority onto the idea of an absolute context, believing absolute context a form of authoritative adherence; I probably feel the same regarding perception.

When you say proven you mean "process"; when I say proven I mean "existant" with no reference to process whatsoever.

Id is very different from ego .

[Expat]

Everything is belief. All things that you see is just belief in them. All facts you think you know, you do not. Nothing can and will every be truly proven unless we can prove an absolute context, which is most probably impossible.

+

PoLR

[Logos]

Everything is belief. All things that you see is just belief in them. All facts you think you know, you do not. Nothing can and will every be truly proven unless we can prove an absolute context, which is most probably impossible.

+

PoLR

I hope that you are not trying to throw another poster into the "INFp Reject Bin" here.

[Hitta]

Everything is belief. All things that you see is just belief in them. All facts you think you know, you do not. Nothing can and will every be truly proven unless we can prove an absolute context, which is most probably impossible.

+

PoLR

I think this could be PoLR as well, the question is what conclusion he draws from this. From what I can see it is a negative one. This is a freshman philosophy argument, but one I think most people contend with, which is why it's a freshman philosophy one.

I think one can acquire this idea regardless of one's "Type".

ISFps tend to be very experimental with their bodily sensations. ISFps love to feel complete euphoria. This often leads them to experiment with drugs or some other substance that causes their bodies to feel euphoric. ISFps love to be on the move. They never want to slow down with anything they are doing. They hate the concept of fatigue. ISFps naturally are very aggressive people. They tend to start many different tasks. ISFps can and will be rebellious at times. They do not like someone telling them what to do. They usually like to take charge in most situations. This can often lead people to think of them as being erratic.

Here is what I think a example of why I think Hitta is valuing. Look at what he concentrates on in his description of ISFp, he describes the and of the subject in question.

Hitta's type descriptions are not very good, but they are a good indicator of his own type.

Love euphoria..., Do drugs...
Don't like being told what to do.... Take charge...

The use of dynamic activity pertaining to static emotion is what is leading me to believe he is valuing.

And could we lay off the ethical types... Ethics types can be very smart, even genius. It is no barrier to understanding of socionics or any subject. Half the reason people mistype themselves T is because of the bias against ethical types.

Oh I understand now.... you've had a lobotomy.

[munenori2]

I think it's hilarious that everyone thinks everyone else here is a complete moron. I notice this tends to follow any sort of disagreement, even if it's just perceived. I mean, really, can't we get past this and discuss these things without taking every criticism as an attack on our personal character? Sure, it may feel satisfying to launch full all out attacks on one another, but hell if we're doing anything productive.

[tcaudilllg]

It has to hard time doing repetition. In fact, it hates repetition.

I think +Ne/-Ni hates knowing what is going to happen next rather than simply repetition; because if you think about it, knowing that you're going to repeat something just so falls under the category of knowing what's going to happen next. - looks at time negatively, in my view, and whenever we are looking at time as such, we are using -.

I would be more active on this, I think it's very interesting; but I've got college classes to finish now, everything due at once....