ILIs and Artistic/Creative Bent

[Contra]

So as I've had spent my time in college and taken a wide array of classes, I've pretty much come to the conclusion that I won't find a subject that I like without the ability to be creative in that area. In fact, I've really just uncovered that almost everything I like relates to areas that are classicaly right brained (I know the right brain vs. left brain paradigm is too general but for simplicity's sake bear with me) such as abstract/philosophical thought, music, movies, design, and synthetic abilities. I didn't used to think that certain functions corresponded to brain lateralization, but I'm beginning to think that Ni is almost certainly a right brained function. Any other ILIs find that they agree with me? What subjects do you like that are more left brained?

[Nevero]

from what i've seen of this page it follows that ILIs go for synthesis of concepts. the rest - honestly i think this applies to many other types. those of my friends who are working in stagnating jobs will try to compensate with extra activities where they've found a creative outlet, and curse prolifically on their spare time at what some idiot of a manager or co-worker told them to do and how it won't go anywhere. restrictions, sameness, and stagnancy aren't the preferred work mode for most, unless they have autism or a similar disorder.

[Contra]

On the whole, I definitely agree with you. However, I think it's worth noting that "synthesis of concepts" would be an inherently right brained process. Even Roger Sperry the pioneer of brain lateralization called the right brain the "synthetic mode" vs. the left brain as the "analytic mode". If we affirm synthesis as a primary cognitive process of ILIs, I think we could say it wouldn't be too surprising if they were also largely interested in other right brain areas such as music, art, aesthetics, or what have you. I also agree that I think everyone pretty much hates doing uncreative, rigid work, but I don't think that's quite the same thing as having an interest in creative/artistic areas as I seem to have. Perhaps it would be better to parse out artistic interests and creative interests. Many people like the idea of creating a product or starting a business (which is a creative pursuit), but not everyone likes the idea or even has the ability to think abstractly or think philosophically (which is something many artists/right brained people do). I also want to add that many people have an absolute passion for more left brained pursuits. My programmer friend loves puzzle and strategy/probability games. He will spend hours upon hours playing Magic the Gathering or playing this Unblock me game on his phone. I start to drool when I do stuff like that. I hope I'm being clear. I've written this kind of in a hurry.

[Skepsis]

.

[Narc]

I can say there are shitloads of ILIs in music at the very least.

They'd probably actually outnumber SEEs if you discounted the SEEs that are just performers (so basically human instruments) as opposed to composers.

[Skepsis]

.

[InvisibleJim]

There isn't much point in involving yourself in art for profit unless you are a virtuoso.

Art as a hobby is better.

[Skepsis]

.

[InvisibleJim]

That is why I ended up switching back to Biology; there were more career opportunities and I was able to find a job that actually paid for my education and then some. Every once in a while, I'll still do some art, but not nearly as much as I used to.

Wise decision.

[yeves]

I can say there are shitloads of ILIs in music at the very least.

They'd probably actually outnumber SEEs if you discounted the SEEs that are just performers (so basically human instruments) as opposed to composers.

can you give a few examples of ILIs in music?

[Contra]

Interesting thread. I consider myself to be very artistic, very imaginative, while at the same time quite adept at solving problems that my require a creative solution. It's weird really. There are many people I know who are exclusively artistic and readily admit to their weak problem solving abilities, and I know many great problem solvers that don't have an artistic bone in their body.Yet, here I am, able to straddle the line. It does seem that I am more right brain than left, but I don't know.

I pretty much have the same skill set that you mentioned. I spend a good deal of my time daydreaming/imagining things, but I'm pretty good at thinking philosophically in a creative way and finding a creative solution to problems, which obviously requires a bit of logical ability. Where I really lack is the ability to deal with certain types of puzzles (Like that 2048 game, just shoot me) and my math ability is pretty lacking but I don't know if that's due to a real deficit or just so little interest that I fell behind years ago.

I read that being left or right brain is more of a pop psychology anyways and the hemispheres are much more integrated in reality.

It is and they are but I'd be willing to bet that functions are predominately proprietary to one of the hemispheres, e.g. Te being left brained while Ni being right brained. Not 100% positive about that though. The actual neuroscience behind brain lateralization is super interesting, but also absolutely overwhelming.

I tried to paint a body dissolving into spirit. The flesh became translucent, revealing the skeletal system and part of the circulatory system and I had spirit coming out of the heart and through the skull.

That sounds awesome. I was really interested in making art as a kid but I wasn't great. I could always conceive what I wanted to make but when it came to putting it down I was pretty bad because my fine motor skills probably fall into the .001% worst of people. No joke.

There isn't much point in involving yourself in art for profit unless you are a virtuoso.

Art as a hobby is better.

That is true. There's a reason why I'm doing Finance. However, you don't really have to be a pro to be in a successful band (depends on your definition of success though). You just have to be on the cutting edge of what people are into.

[chemical]

I found this thread interesting, and am just reviving it to comment a bit.

It is and they are but I'd be willing to bet that functions are predominately proprietary to one of the hemispheres, e.g. Te being left brained while Ni being right brained.

I find the idea of this interesting, and it does strike me as true; I'm not sure how true hemispheres are in a fully empirical sense, but I think the idea of them carries some merit regardless. Te is more procedural, algorithmic, and so forth. A strong Ni and a lesser Te would mean one is more sluggish carrying out the procedural aspects of something. It's the part where you get out of synthesizing impressions forming spontaneously and begin to delineate the procedure.

The reason I found this thread interesting is that I think that sometimes it is understated how hard it is to reach the stage of implementation. I find the idea of gamma being this materialistic quadra really strange, and contradictory to how ILI is commonly portrayed, which is to say it is commonly portrayed as a much more philosophical type.

That's part of the flaw I think inherent to assuming the information elements serve a similar role regardless of their position, meaning I am not sure how true it is that Te is about "profit" no matter where you position it, because it's really, really hard for me to imagine a genuine Ni base being so profit-obsessed. They may have a more philosophical take on profit and such. Implementation, rational discernment as to when to take action based on a keen knowledge of reality may make more sense.

[some chair]

Here is Papa Reinin's enumeration of what the elements are about:

- Subjective logic. It is my own logic, my understanding, explanation, description, concept, and theory of things. It is my hierarchy of notions of the things that are closer or farther, higher or lower. It is what I was taught, my view of this world, my world outlook. It includes my education, i.e. the system of my ideas and my schooling.


- Objective logic. Logic of the objective world - objective circumstances, facts. Example: the day began and it started raining. Systems, statistics. Event queue. Example: "I am late for work because the bridge collapsed". Laws, political policies of the government, stamps in the passport, traffic laws, prices, private summerhouse property, my territory, and design drawing of a unit. Thinking objectively people usually ask: "I want to know the reality of the matter."

[chemical]

My issue is that using the word "my" to describe logic, concepts and so forth is fine and all, but I suppose how can someone rationalize something and not have it be their own personal understanding? That would apply even to objective logic in so much as it's their rationalization of the "reality" of the situation.

I think "my outlook" or "my synthesis of ideas/concepts" could still pertain to Ni, it really depends whether there's a system/logic focus on an intuitive focus.

At the most, I can say Ti is less tied to describing ideas grounded in facts, and thus isn't procedural in nature. It could isolate principles of a general nature and relate them logically. It's theory in the sense that it extracts general relations between things and places these relations into a logical system. These principles or ideas needn't pertain to actual factual occurrences though they can extrapolate from such occurrences.

I think it's important to note ILI does have strong Ti working in the background, yet they place less emphasis on having logical categories to turn to, unlike say the beta quadra. The advantage of logical categories is there is a sense of inherent consistency and fairness about it. I don't see ILI as a type interested in spitting out facts, as they're equally subjective to the Ti base types.

Rather, I see the fundamental difference between ILI and the Ti base mentality as about static versus dynamic, in that static subjective understanding is organized into pre-existing laws organizing the ideologies into categories and so forth. This, again, produces an explicit vantage point for checking things through a well-defined system. Ni-Te doesn't operate this way, in that the logic's only function is to obtain a clear knowledge of the involved facts and their logical inter-relations, and the subjective understanding of Ni is less explicit in how it assesses the situation, given this is both an internally oriented IE and a subjective one (internal dynamics of fields). This sacrifices a well-defined body of logical rules that applies in any existing situation.

What is true however is ILI possess strong Ti (of equal dimensionality to Ni) so they can sort of pull out a systematic explanation of their statements, but the difference is this systematic explanation would change with time, which is why they prefer the Ni perspective on things; the reason they have such strong Ti is simple - why not? They are a logical type, and they are a subjectively oriented type, looking to promote understanding that is subjectively oriented, so it's natural this is actually even easier to do in a sense than Te. They may even have various Ti systems absorbed into their web of knowledge, but ultimately they are a lot looser about the static nature of it. Obviously this does have its disadvantages, because it means that when an explicit logical proof is required, these types can be dismissive, and I think Ti-demonstrative exactly comes in when they can produce a systematic explanation of their selection, but know it is super context dependent, and thus in a sense dispensable.

Those types that value Ti over Ni will tend to believe that, while the Ni take on things is useful, for the most part static categories provide a certain reliability and sense of universality that they prefer. They may still have the capability to turn to Ni as needed, but overall they don't believe it as "productive" often to turn to the Ni perspective.

One thing which characterizes the inertia of Ni bases which doesn't happen with Ti is that the resistance to working with explicit categories renders the activity of Ni bases more indefinite, and completely mental. They may play with ways of putting things into categories, but ultimately this is secondary to them, and more of an exercise in building understanding, not the kind of data they hold onto long term (which is how they are generally thinking)

[Contra]

I found this thread interesting, and am just reviving it to comment a bit.



I find the idea of this interesting, and it does strike me as true; I'm not sure how true hemispheres are in a fully empirical sense, but I think the idea of them carries some merit regardless. Te is more procedural, algorithmic, and so forth. A strong Ni and a lesser Te would mean one is more sluggish carrying out the procedural aspects of something. It's the part where you get out of synthesizing impressions forming spontaneously and begin to delineate the procedure.

Yeah, I think you are right. My idea in this thread is not that there is such a thing as absolute hemispheric dominance but the ideas of functions necessitate some degree of hemispheric dominance due to the fact that they fit rather easily into cut and dry categories of left vs. right brain actions. I suppose some (or perhaps all) functions could activate diffusely across the brain. It would certainly justify the amount of diversity within types themselves but that would really start to blur the line of what a function "is" in a cognitive sense and there isn't a ton of info. to back that up. Whatever the case, it's a bit of a given that synthesis is a right brained action and ILI are, predominantly, synthesizers.

Recently I've been leaning towards the idea that the IEs serve as overarching categories of information of which all cognitive actions fall into, and model A just represents the necessary prioritization/orientation for those actions in a given time. That would represent the entirety of the type. I'm not sure how rigid or malleable the type itself would be in such a case, but the brain would obviously have a set of preferences and values for certain cognitive actions. This would make the ideas of functions existing in the brain less material and more perceptual. Just my half-baked idea.

The reason I found this thread interesting is that I think that sometimes it is understated how hard it is to reach the stage of implementation. I find the idea of gamma being this materialistic quadra really strange, and contradictory to how ILI is commonly portrayed, which is to say it is commonly portrayed as a much more philosophical type.

That's part of the flaw I think inherent to assuming the information elements serve a similar role regardless of their position, meaning I am not sure how true it is that Te is about "profit" no matter where you position it, because it's really, really hard for me to imagine a genuine Ni base being so profit-obsessed. They may have a more philosophical take on profit and such. Implementation, rational discernment as to when to take action based on a keen knowledge of reality may make more sense.

I think the materialistic part of Gamma would be the extraverts rather than the introverts. I agree with you though.

As for your second post, I think you nailed it (to my uncritical eye, at least).

[Radio]

hi contra, how are you doing?

[Contra]

hi contra, how are you doing?

Doing well. Thank you.

[krieger]

they seem a bit too dry & factual to really stand out as artists by default. occasionally an HR Giger, HP Lovecraft or Beksinsky pops up, though.

[Contra]

they seem a bit too dry & factual to really stand out as artists by default. occasionally an HR Giger, HP Lovecraft or Beksinsky pops up, though.

I agree, they aren't the artist archetype by any means and I don't think they are particularly likely to become artists unless you are talking about maybe movie producers or authors. However, I was thinking that Ni may lend itself to artistic skills because I think, maybe, that Ni itself is predominately a function that requires larger usage of the right hemisphere compared to other functions. I've always enjoyed art and would have been halfway decent had I had better fine motor skill. I didn't know if other ILI also enjoyed artistic/creative fields even if the two aren't necessarily the same

[chemical]

Intuition becomes more and more prone to an artistic outlet if feeling is coupled with it, I think. Yet intuition by itself when in the leading position (as opposed to creative even) is very prone to spontaneous insight as opposed to something deliberated through conscious rationalization, and how those who have strongly tapped intuition have described it is often in relation to their creative faculties (although creativity is certainly not exclusive to those of the intuitive focus). Obviously the information it grants you can still ultimately appear as something that can be unpacked to a rational statement, but this would not be appreciating the entirety of what intuition is about and what trusting it means, since ultimately it is an irrational filter, not a rational one.

If one is familiar with Jung, he for instance types Nietzsche as basically the closest equivalent of ILI (I'm aware though of the various differences), meaning a lead intuitive of the introverted sort with secondary thinking, and a very active thinking. He pointed out the intuitive faculties naturally led to an artistic manner of composition in various of his works, some of which had strong mixtures of feeling, despite his being quite confident that Nietzsche (in his system) was mostly a thinking type over a feeling type.

A similar thing could probably happen with ILI. Obviously especially with the Ni subtype.

[Aylen]

I was just wondering about my friend's type today. He is an artist, poet and writer and I am starting to think he may be ILI with special circumstances contributing to his personality. He is often known to describe people as he imagines them. This is what he wrote about me:

Edit:
This felt too personal for me to share here but if anyone wants to see it for the creative content just pm me.

*I changed my real name to Aylen

Edit: I have never experienced anything that feels like human emotion coming from this person but I care about him anyway and he doesn't seem to get irritated with my use of Fe. If anything he ignores Fe related expressions, as in doesn't respond, and he is a bit Spock-like.

[chemical]

Basically, having direct memories and observations of people but the impressions sinking deep in is an introverted sensation thing, whereas having observations which have an interesting intuitive or imaginative blend would be more Ni base. You get the sense of intuitions cascading onto each other to convey a picture, rather than an attempt to exactly convey logically in the form of abstract principles. It's more akin to abstract imagery than abstract principles in terms of the fundamental knowledge it conveys. There's a certain richness to how Ni bases view reality.

By itself, being unemotional could be a function of many types, lots of the logical types, in so much as I'm hesitant to truly reduce Fe-polr to that. Any ethical function can involve a deep emotional component, after all. Fi can involve deep emotional attachments, attractions and so forth (especially with Ni-subtype ILI, there can be a really deep, subjectively driven attraction or relational connection behind a lot of their activities). Where Fi doesn't succeed much is in expressiveness and live dynamical interplay of the emotions, which requires extraversion to carry forth after all, because essentially you are performing a deliberated emotional activity in real time by any expression/affection of another's emotional state.

Vague impression is your guy does sound like he could be Ni-base, and ILI at that (though I'm again a bit hesitant because we haven't really seen Te, just apparently not seen classical Fe).

The other thing to keep in mind though is you can't just view IE in isolation. I don't see Fe creative as exactly being fuzzy and expressive of warmth or something in IEI. I see it more as an expression of their Ni, trying to get at the very essence of emotional dynamics, and it's likely to be quite creative and artistic in a lot of the real life examples as my speculations go. Some examples may be less creativity oriented and more just direct realizations of a power-seeking mentality though (akin to ethical manipulation, and I mean, not simple stuff, it has to be the very essence of their cognition). Ni is really not about concrete events, it's more about perceiving subjectively the potential for psychical life, and with Fe creative, this is the sort of thing that's finding expression in the emotional sphere.

So I'd not totally rule out the Fe necessarily, in that sure a IEI may be less likely to seem unexpressive than an ILI, but seem is different from reality and with introverts this is always a problem, you don't get a direct, outward oriented expressive attitude necessarily.

[Aylen]

^ That was very helpful.

I had some more thoughts about his type while in the car which is interesting because I don't much like to think about socionics in relation to my friends.

He and I connected totally on a metaphysical/otherworldly kind of level. He is more eccentric than most other people I have met. Even though our interests are similar I can tell where he draws the line with me and considers some of my beliefs (faeries for example) nonsense. He just doesn't come out and say it to me in that way. His metaphysical beliefs are always backed up with some kind of Te type information even though the source may be questionable to others. If he has validated the source as being reliable then he is more inclined to listen to it.

He is very skeptical (for someone holding these kinds of beliefs) and unless he can find historical data to back some things up he will dismiss the ideas presented to him but in a respectful way. In 12 years of knowing him he has always treated me with a lot of respect. I know he cares deeply for me and my well-being even though he has not expressed an ounce of Fe type emotions, or any obvious emotion at all, despite that I know that he has deep feelings. He is just not one to show them to others but I know. His caring is expressed in a matter of fact almost practical way. When I almost died he said to me that he was relieved that I didn't die. He didn't care to discuss the matter and I didn't offer. I know he read my blogs even though he never said he did. Just a lot of "knowing" involved when it comes to him.

I know he cares for the Earth and the Universe in general. He is a deep thinker and has what some would call "psychic" abilities but for me this is just normal kind of stuff.

His art and writings would make Giger proud. I have never actually heard him laugh and I have known him 12 years. His humor is dry but not particularly dark even though his art is VERY. He is prone to sarcasm and irony but even that has no, hmm, bite to it. He is not as much of a recluse as me. He will go to parties but inevitably sit alone in a corner waiting to be approached. In a picture with friends he always has the same look on his face. Neutral even though everyone else is smiling. He reminds me of a cross between, Sheldon Cooper, Prot, and Spock. I have protective feelings for him and I am not sure if he understands why but I sense it is appreciated. He seems naive and childlike to me in many ways. Like I said there are some special circumstances in his case but it is obvious to me he is intuitive, logical and introverted but not sure of the exact order. I am leaning toward Intuitive first though.

[xerx]

I doubt that type has very much influence on artistic talent.

[Aylen]

I doubt that type has very much influence on artistic talent.

I agree but type may have an influence on the themes they choose to portray through their art. My ex played classical guitar and got a scholarship to http://mi.edu/ before getting into the computer and library sciences and changing his direction to attend NYU and Columbia University. The fact that he chose music in the beginning was very upsetting to his dad but his mom liked to encourage him to be artistic since she was.

Guitar was a hobby and something he enjoyed but not his choice in career. He was ILI. As amazing as he was on guitar he never had the physical presence or the desire to perform in front of a lot of people. It was like a hidden passion or something but he kind of approached it in a very logical way which is hard to explain. I could feel a lot of emotion when he played but he never gave off the vibe that he got emotional pleasure from it. Perhaps he did though.

[chemical]

I don't think type has to do with any specific talent, because sure, while "feeling" may help with artistic endeavors, its position doesn't determine your talent at specific art forms, more the general tendency you have to employ feeling in life. You can easily have some logic bases who for instance compose music of very amazing kinds.
The other obvious reason is the information elements are your perspective on information, rather than how good you are. This can be related, but there are always exceptions.