Extroverted intuition Ne in ENFps vs ENTps (alpha +Ne vs. delta -Ne)

[Sabo]

I saw someone post this in another thread:

A tendency to make suggestions and to build on them in an 'adventurous' way is a sign of Ne+ according to Gulenko, and something antagonistic to Ne-. So under this interpretation you would not be an ENFp, but some Alpha or Beta type.

I know the general consensus on the +/- thing here is that it's bullshit, but I'm curious whether ENFps could comment on the accuracy of the above statement... and if it's not true, what are the differences between leading Ne in ENFps and ENTps in your experience?

[Slacker]

The only difference is whether the Ne is paired with Ti or Fi. There is no + or -.

http://socionist.blogspot.com/2006/1...intuition.html - that's a blog entry by Rick talking a bit about Ne in each.

[leckysupport]

One way that I've seen Ne manifest itself in IEEs is with unexpected behaviour based on unexpected sentiments between people and other people, objects or situations.

They seem to know about it and warn other people about the possibilities of it. i.e how close friends can hurting you while they think they are helping you or how the could end up hating you, how enemies could immerge from nowhere (once friends), how people can slowly become deluded in odd times, possible range of how people can feel etc.

They also seem to have a understanding of conflicting feelings (this is more of a EII thing) and where they come from and sometimes they might actually know what to do about it (but a lot of the times they don't). They also warn of the possiblities of being in odd unhelpful relationships based on conflicting feelings.

They also have normal Ne skills of weighing up possibilites, covering all the bases, regular stream of insights, preparation (covering all the bases again), coming up with systems that are difficult to break down (usually through unexpected human behaviour)...etc

I might try ILE Ne later.

[Sabo]

The only difference is whether the Ne is paired with Ti or Fi. There is no + or -.

Yeah, I don't really buy into the whole +/- thing (although I'll remain open to evidence in favor of it). I'm curious whether Ne paired with Ti would manifest itself as "A tendency to make suggestions and to build on them in an 'adventurous' way" whereas Ne combined with Fi would not.

Thanks for the link... some good stuff there.

One way that I've seen Ne manifest itself in IEEs is with unexpected behaviour based on unexpected sentiments between people and other people, objects or situations.

They seem to know about it and warn other people about the possibilities of it. i.e how close friends can hurting you while they think they are helping you or how the could end up hating you, how enemies could immerge from nowhere (once friends), how people can slowly become deluded in odd times, possible range of how people can feel etc.

They also seem to have a understanding of conflicting feelings (this is more of a EII thing) and where they come from and sometimes they might actually know what to do about it (but a lot of the times they don't). They also warn of the possiblities of being in odd unhelpful relationships based on conflicting feelings.

They also have normal Ne skills of weighing up possibilites, covering all the bases, regular stream of insights, preparation (covering all the bases again), coming up with systems that are difficult to break down (usually through unexpected human behaviour)...etc

I might try ILE Ne later.

Hmm... interesting. Thanks for the response -- and yeah, an ILE Ne one would be cool.

[leckysupport]

Also this: http://socionist.blogspot.com/search/label/IEE

and this: http://socionist.blogspot.com/search/label/quadras

The group threat thing is based on Ne and Fi in delta.

Edit: and I won't try a ILE one because I don't think I know what I'm talking about yet.

[strrrng]

The only difference is whether the Ne is paired with Ti or Fi. There is no + or -.

If there is a difference between Ne paired with Ti and Ne paired with Fi, it seems only logical that it would be described by a + or a -, denoting orientation.

My father is an ENFp, myself being INTj, and I can say that I have witnessed our differences in Ne quite a bit. For example, when we were discussing right and wrong, in terms of morality, I took a more relative standpoint, breaking things down and showing that those were not absolute terms. He took a more absolute standpoint, saying he could "feel" an innate sense of right and wrong.....this seems very -Ti+Ne vs. -Ne+Fi, if you ask me.

+Ne - "Multiple viewpoints, relativity, perceptions, "grey area" viewpoints, comparisons between objects and different relative planes...separation from accepted reality"

-Ne - "Single viewpoint, absolutionism...understanding objects in accepted plane...acceptance of "normal" reality"

this isn't to say that ENFp's are narrow-minded - hardly. but + is about process, building, expanding, while - is about regression, result and breaking down. I simply can't see how you can regard these as total bullshit. There is a grey area between hitta's definitions and obsoleteness.

[Slacker]

There is NO kinds of Ne that can be called "single viewpoint". That is the opposite of Ne, not -Ne. ENFps have just plain ole' Ne.

[strrrng]

There is NO kinds of Ne that can be called "single viewpoint". That is the opposite of Ne, not -Ne. ENFps have just plain ole' Ne.

you're misunderstanding it. It doesn't mean one viewpoint.

Extroverted intuition is about seeing possibilities. however, the orientation of it determines what one does with those possibilities. The +Ne strives to expand on and explore all the possibilities. -Ne tries to winnow out 'pointless' ones, so that they may find the best answer or perspective. And if you think about the nature of +/-, it makes sense, because +, by definition, deals with expansion, while - with regression. That is why +Ne is associated with creation of ideas and -Ne finds fault with them. both are equal attributes.

you're just biased because you're ENFp and you don't want to be defined as narrow-minded. There is no better or worse. For example, I wish I could keep myself from focusing too much on all the possibilities and getting caught up in nothingness.

[Slacker]

you're misunderstanding it. It doesn't mean one viewpoint.

Extroverted intuition is about seeing possibilities. however, the orientation of it determines what one does with those possibilities. The +Ne strives to expand on and explore all the possibilities. -Ne tries to winnow out 'pointless' ones, so that they may find the best answer or perspective. And if you think about the nature of +/-, it makes sense, because +, by definition, deals with expansion, while - with regression. That is why +Ne is associated with creation of ideas and -Ne finds fault with them. both are equal attributes.

you're just biased because you're ENFp and you don't want to be defined as narrow-minded. There is no better or worse. For example, I wish I could keep myself from focusing too much on all the possibilities and getting caught up in nothingness.

No, I'm not biased because I'm ENFp. I simply recognize that it is complete and utter bullshit.

I wish people would stop re-writing Socionics before they even understand it.

[betterthandead]

yomama

[strrrng]

No, I'm not biased because I'm ENFp. I simply recognize that it is complete and utter bullshit.

I wish people would stop re-writing Socionics before they even understand it.

pff...anyone can simply claim something is bullshit because they don't like it and can find a small detail that isn't perfect. how about giving a halfway compelling argument on why +/- is bullshit - and try to be objective this time.

[Sabo]

Well, I'm not going to discard the +/- thing as complete bullshit since I haven't researched it very much, but I'm not going to buy into it for now because I have yet to see a halfway compelling argument in favor of it. The burden of proof is on you.

[Mea]

ENFps are good at spotting possible negative vibes between relationships.

Hmm. That may be Fi in ENFps. I dunno.

[strrrng]

I have second-guessed the +/- thing before, don't get me wrong. but look at this logic: If intuition is paired with thinking, it will be used in a different way than if it was paired with feeling. that premise is CORRECT. therefore, the standard, general definition of Ne just isn't enough. There has to be two types, based on the obvious premise. therefore, +/- would seem completely logical. and it also makes sense in accepting/producing terms....having all odd/even elements as the same orientation, which would make sense because they do two opposite things in order to produce a balanced result.

[Slacker]

No, +/- isn't completely logical. Just because Ne is slightly different when paired with Ti than with Fi doesn't mean they are opposite. They are used the same way but with different creative functions. They don't do opposite things - Ne is ONE function and it does one thing. It never looks to just one possibility - it is all about multiple possibilities regardless of which function it's paired with. They just focus on the potential and possibilities of different things.

[strrrng]

It never looks to just one possibility - it is all about multiple possibilities regardless of which function it's paired with.

I never said it looks at one possibility! they both see the possibilites; -Ne narrows it down to the best, while +Ne expands on them.

whatever, think what you want, I'm done arguing this....some people just don't want their perceptions of themselves rattled, I guess.

[Slacker]

I never said it looks at one possibility! they both see the possibilites; -Ne narrows it down to the best, while +Ne expands on them.

whatever, think what you want, I'm done arguing this....some people just don't want their perceptions of themselves rattled, I guess.

Would you stop assuming what my motivations are? You're just plain wrong. I know what Ne is and I'm trying to explain to you that you are wrong. There's nothing more to it than that. What I hate is when people have these stupid fringe ideas and then confuse people who are new to Socionics and are trying to learn what is actually part of Socionics.

Ne is Ne. It is never the opposite of Ne. It is used with other functions, but regardless of which function it is being used with, it is still Ne.

[strrrng]

I know what Ne is and I'm trying to explain to you that you are wrong.

you have a conception of Ne. you're trying to convince me I'm "wrong," lol? right, wrong....give me a break....learn some humility....if it were so obvious that your perspective was right, there would be no notion of +/- in the first place.

you're not trying to convince me I'm wrong; you're just trying to reassure your perspective....how quaint.

[strrrng]

btw, here's a good reason why you're "wrong." If +/- are bullshit, quadra values cease to exist. Think about it: the betas no longer have that fighting spirit, the delta's no longer value the stability, and so on....

here: http://socionics.us/works/gulenko_quadras.shtml

if that doesn't show you the light, you're blind.

[Slacker]

Quadra values are about what particular information elements are valued. Like Beta likes Se, Fe, Ni, and Ti. That particular combination is specific to Beta, and that's what creates Beta quadra values.

btw, here's a good reason why you're "wrong." If +/- are bullshit, quadra values cease to exist. Think about it: the betas no longer have that fighting spirit, the delta's no longer value the stability, and so on....

here: http://socionics.us/works/gulenko_quadras.shtml

if that doesn't show you the light, you're blind.

[leckysupport]

What I hate is when people have these stupid fringe ideas and then confuse people who are new to Socionics and are trying to learn what is actually part of Socionics.

It's the same idea put in slightly different way (more Ti)... that's it.

[strrrng]

Quadra values are about what particular information elements are valued. Like Beta likes Se, Fe, Ni, and Ti. That particular combination is specific to Beta, and that's what creates Beta quadra values.

did you read the article? The +/- is what truly seperates the quadras. Alphas value +Ne, which is why they are the creators of ideas....deltas value -Ne, which is why they find faults with ideas and look for alternatives to make sure they can keep the system that they have implemented running smoothly. beta values -Se, which deals with revolution and overthrow of authority, which is why they have that "fighting spirit"...gamma values +Se, which is why they try to establish consistency structure....the list goes on....it's so clear, stop hiding from it.

[consentingadult]

did you read the article? The +/- is what truly seperates the quadras. Alphas value +Ne, which is why they are the creators of ideas....deltas value -Ne, which is why they find faults with ideas and look for alternatives to make sure they can keep the system that they have implemented running smoothly. beta values -Se, which deals with revolution and overthrow of authority, which is why they have that "fighting spirit"...gamma values +Se, which is why they try to establish consistency structure....the list goes on....it's so clear, stop hiding from it.

Wouldn't you think the effects of the +/- attitudes you define here are rather the result of Ti and Fi instead of Ne attitude? Deltas do not value -Ne, but Ne+Fi, which causes them to be cautious and look for negative effects, mailny on people. Alphas do not value +Ne, but Ne+Ti, which seems to imply a focus on the benefits for the system being changed while downplaying or ignoring effects on people (simply put). Ti sacrifices people to the system, whereas Fi sacrifes the system to the people. Like Slacker Mom said: there is only one Ne.

You can have your +Ne and -Ne if you want to, but be sure to discard Ti and Fi in the process, for these would create redundancy in type descriptions.

(P.S. this is not an endorsement of Socioncs on my behalf, I'm just working within the framework of Jung's concepts, regardless of the question whether or not it's a valid framework.)

[strrrng]

The reason why ENFp's focus on the benefit of the people and implement the system based on that is a direct result of process-oriented +Fi with result-oriented -Ne. the same can be said of alphas NT's: their process-oriented +Ne generates ideas and their result-oriented -Ti develops the system.

You can have your +Ne and -Ne if you want to, but be sure to discard Ti and Fi in the process, for these would create redundancy in type descriptions.

umm, actually +/- is what keeps things from being redundant. If alpha and delta both used the same, "one" intuition, they would barely differ on quadra values.

[Slacker]

umm, actually +/- is what keeps things from being redundant. If alpha and delta both used the same, "one" intuition, they would barely differ on quadra values.

HUH?

Alpha quadra values: Fe, Ti, Si, Ne
Delta quadra values: Fi, Te, Si, Ne

Since when did 50% the same equal "barely differ"?

[strrrng]

Since when did 50% the same equal "barely differ"?

quaras should be 0% the same

[strrrng]

why do you think betas are known for revolution and gammas for consistency? hmm...I wonder...-Se and +Se

I'm not proclaiming this like hitta, just recognizing its validity.

[Slacker]

quaras should be 0% the same

Not according to Socionics. Not sure what theory you're working with.

[strrrng]

you have no logicallu compelling argument against +/-. All you say is "there's only one N"...how convenient that you are ENFp.

[consentingadult]

you have no logicallu compelling argument against +/-. All you say is "there's only one N"...how convenient that you are ENFp.

Logically compelling argument?? Other people don't have to prove you're wrong, you have to prove your right! How about you presenting us some nice empirical data that proves your logical deductions, preferably in the form of a statistical correlation analysis that proves +Ne and -Ne do exist independently of each other and are not correlated in some degree??

[leckysupport]

Logically compelling argument?? Other people don't have to prove you're wrong, you have to prove your right! How about you presenting us some nice empirical data that proves your logical deductions, preferably in the form of a statistical correlation analysis that proves +Ne and -Ne do exist independently of each other and are not correlated in some degree??

Then we would have to empirically prove Ne exsits and we don't have the means to do that.

[strrrng]

+Ne and -Ne do exist independently of each other and are not correlated in some degree??

of course they're correlated in some way, being the same function in essence, but they simply manifest differently.

I posted a very good article by gulenko on quadras which dealt with this. It gave a detailed analysis of how each function, along with its orientation, played into each quadra's values and roles. and it didn't do that +Ne/-Ni shit that hitta does, it just focused on the actual functions valued.

I have to prove shit to you? oh ok, I see, so you can sit back on your basic idea and say you're right until someone presents something else you like...how quaint.

[consentingadult]

Then we would have to empirically prove Ne exsits and we don't have the means to do that.

Actually, we do have the means:

According to cirtical research into the MBTI, the S/N Dichotomy has a correlation of 0.72 with the Openness to Exprience dimension of the Five Factor Model of personality. And as we all know, FFM is an empirically based model, not theoretical.

Ne and Ni together are basically what FFM calls "Openness to Experience" (and Se/Si lack thereof).

Now of course you can object that Socionics and MBTI are not the same, but regardless of that I think a have demonstrated that there IS a way to hypothesize that Ne/Ni do exist and confirm or reject this hypothesis by finding out if a correlation can be demonstrated with FFM.

[strrrng]

yeah, what a great example (rolls eyes).

How would Se be correlated with lower openness to experience? ESxp's are the most adventurous of the types?

[leckysupport]

yeah, what a great example (rolls eyes).

How would Se be correlated with lower openness to experience? ESxp's are the most adventurous of the types?

Screw the example the guy has a point. Not to my knowledge has anyone gone through all the empirically tested data and tried to find socionic equivalents.

It's definitely worth a try.

[consentingadult]

Screw the example the guy has a point. Not to my knowledge has anyone gone through all the empirically tested data and tried to find socionic equivalents.

It's definitely worth a try.

Thank you for ackowledging this. Now I'm not a social scientist myself, but if I had to do it, I would do it as follows:

- take a group of people who have no knowledge of MBTI, Socionics or any personality system (e.g. Ennea etc).
- have their Socionic types determined by a group of 'respected' Socionists
- have the people fill out questions that are in the IPIP-NEO domain (http://ipip.ori.org/)
- perform statistical analysis to see if there are correlations between Socionic type and the FFM/Big5

Since the IPIP questions are in 'public domain', it could actually be done! Now I hypothesize that, since Socionics is a better model than MBTI, with less errors, stronger correlations can be demonstrated between Socionics and FFM, but not on all dimensions (I expect Socionics E/I to be less correlated with FFM Extraverion than MBTI E/I, because FFM and MBTI E/I are more about Eyseneck's E/I than Jung's E/I).

yeah, what a great example (rolls eyes).

How would Se be correlated with lower openness to experience? ESxp's are the most adventurous of the types?

Se is, sorry if I'm putting it in a politically incorrect way, nothing less than the lack of thinking through own behavior, some degree of inability to foresee consequenses, to consider other possibilities than the ones already known. The result: when under stress ESXp's are more likely to resort to physical violence or verbal violence that implies physical violence (where ENXp's are probably more likely to verbal violence that attack people's mental abilities and insecurities), to force other people into submission by means of violence. But it's not only Openness to Experience that plays a role, the dimension of Neuroticism (the tendency to experience negative emotions, a dimension not measured by Jungian typology although some researchers claim high neuroticism correlates to NFJ, and low neuroticsm to STP) is what makes some types such as xSxp's less prone to perceiving dangers, which makes them more adventurous, at least in the physical sense. But please note that 'adventurousness' is also a matter of definition: if you would ask people to further elaborate on what 'adventure' means to them, you would probably get opposing answers. A basic distinction that can be made is between physical and intellectual adventurousness. The word 'adventurous' all by itself is vague and can have many different meanings.

Does this answer your question?

[consentingadult]

I saw someone post this in another thread: I know the general consensus on the +/- thing here is that it's bullshit, but I'm curious whether ENFps could comment on the accuracy of the above statement... and if it's not true, what are the differences between leading Ne in ENFps and ENTps in your experience?

In addition to my last post and referring back to the original question of this thread: the differences between ENFps and ENTps are not only in the Ti/Fi difference, but hypothetically might also relate to higher Neuroticism in ENFps, a dimension of personality not measured directly in Socioncs. Of course, if this is really true, can only be determined after empirical research. This would mean that ENFps are less 'adventurous' than ENTps, because they are more likely to experience negative emotions in anticipation to suggested changes. But I stress: I don't know this, it's just hypothesis!

[consentingadult]

yeah, what a great example (rolls eyes).

How would Se be correlated with lower openness to experience? ESxp's are the most adventurous of the types?

P.S. after reading your reply once more, I realized that you might have misunderstood the what Openness to Experience entails to FFM. It is not about physical sensations, e.g. when sky-diving, but more about intellectual stimuli:

Sample Openness items

* I am full of ideas.
* I am quick to understand things.
* I have a rich vocabulary.
* I have a vivid imagination.
* I have excellent ideas.
* I spend time reflecting on things.
* I use difficult words.
* I am not interested in abstract ideas. (reversed)
* I do not have a good imagination. (reversed)
* I have difficulty understanding abstract ideas. (reversed)

(Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Fa..._to_Experience)

[Sabo]

Interesting idea, but I'm skeptical about a few things...

For one, FFM seems to be about external personality traits, whereas socionics is more about internal processes. They deal with different aspects of people, so even if there was a correlation between FFM and socionics types, what does that prove other than the fact that people who score higher/lower on certain FFM categories also tend to get assigned certain socionics types? Second, FFM is a lot more vague -- Ne and Ni types could both relate to having "vivid imaginations," but in different ways. And any type can have a "rich vocabulary" -- this probably has more to do with access to education than socionics type. Similarly, "quick to understand things" sounds more related to intelligence than socionics type. It seems like socionics would have less to do with who is "quick to understand things" and more to do with the different ways people understand things.

Just my two cents... it would be fun to see what the correlations are, but I'm not sure how useful it'd be, and I'd be surprised if they were that strong.

[strrrng]

consenting, I am glad you discerned between the various types of "openness to experience". If I recall, it is the intellectual one (titled inquisitiveness on some tests) that is measured by big 5. I would expect N's to score higher on that. however, that personality system is very general, and although it may be based on empirical data, it is still far from comprehensive.