Ne vs Ni base?

[ryoka14]

so ive been trying to understand Ne vs Ni and how it would manifest as a base..? to people who understand this better is this close to being right?

Ne looks at possibilities through relationships set by reality, and changes variables within to understand possibilities. Using crude math, let's say Ne user understands that relationship of X and N is affected by way of function F. where N is an external object of interest and X is the User

F=X + N

He takes F as set by reality and determines this relationship through his intuition. Now, through his intuition, he understands how F will change if he varies X or N. He does this most easily through his introverted function, by internally "manipulating" X he is able to achieve his desired result. Say he wants F to equal 4, and X = 2 and N = 1

He can manipulate X to increase 1. So that F = 4



On the other hand, Ni looks at possibilities through dynamically changing relationships and tries to attain the best option by shifting their external environment to match the desired.
Ni user sees multiple possible relationships, including the reality of F= X + N , he also is looking how the entire relationship of X and N changes with respect to external environment shifts i.e. "fantasy".
That is, under different conditions of reality, Ni explores how the relationship will shift.

Say that Ni also wants "4"

Rather than changing the variables, Ni looks to change the whole relationship. if X is 2 and N is 1, and the relationship is F = X + N, he will try to manipulate reality in a way so that a new relationship is formed, G = X + 2N

Since he wants this, he must intuit how to manipulate the surroundings around him to achieve this, which he manipulates through his extroverted creative function. While both achieve the desired result of "4", they do it by opposite ways. Ne base prefers to change internal realities to conform to intuited external relationships, while Ni base will try to change external realities to find the desired internal relationships.

[Pookie]

I did not understand this.

[ryoka14]

I did not understand this.

ugh was afraid of this maybe its incoherent.

Ni and Ne both look at possibilities right? A possibility is nothing more than a relationship, cause and effect.

Ne looks at possibilities through the lens of pre-existing relationship between variables as set by reality, and finds possibilities by exploring this fully through the introverted creative function.

Ni looks at possibilities through shifting relationships of the variables themselves, and tries to explore this by his extroverted creative function

?

[Pookie]

That seems accurate, but i'm not sure that you could apply those precise delineations in an accurate way. For me - I can differentiate Ni from Ne through the form of how the information is stated. Ni almost always has a subject that is tied into the possibility/probability/pattern thats being talked about. Ne can relay that concept without attaching it to an object.

[ryoka14]

That seems accurate, but i'm not sure that you could apply those precise delineations in an accurate way. For me - I can differentiate Ni from Ne through the form of how the information is stated. Ni almost always has a subject that is tied into the possibility/probability/pattern thats being talked about. Ne can relay that concept without attaching it to an object.

Hmm if i understand what youre saying, i think that makes sense since Ni possibilities need to be explained through some external framework since they are inherently imaginative. Whereas Ne possibilities only need to put together some internal "inputs" and the rest will fall into place / conveyed easily because it is grounded in reality.

Example: NeFi

Focus is on relationships between people. Intuitively examines the reality of the relationships and examines possibilities within the context of that relationship. Then tries to choose desired possibility by manipulating internal states. Tries to find the best possible outcome given a change in internal state (since reality sets possibility).

NiFe

Focus is also on relationships between people. Intuitively examines the relationships between people and examines the possibilities of changing the relationship itself. Because of this, is able to look at the *best possible* relationship attainable given changes in external reality. And thus tries to manipulate this through Fe. Tries to find the best possible outcome given a change in his external surroundings (since imagination sets possibilities).

[anndelise]

Ne base =
Si seeking
Se role
HP cog style with Te HA
And/or CD cog style with Fe HA

Ni base =
Se seeking
Si role
DA cog style with Fi HA
And/or VS cog style with Ti HA


Try keeping those in mind as you write out descriptions. You'll have a higher chance of being more accurate than just focusing on Ne base vs Ni base.

[anndelise]

Ah, I see you have adapted your communication style to that of the OP ;-)

Well' it was directed towards the OP. (Sorry, i should have been more clear about that. And actually, I was pissed off in general (not at the OP)... The only time I can be short posted it seems, lol.)

[ryoka14]

Ne base =
Si seeking
Se role
HP cog style with Te HA
And/or CD cog style with Fe HA

Ni base =
Se seeking
Si role
DA cog style with Fi HA
And/or VS cog style with Ti HA


Try keeping those in mind as you write out descriptions. You'll have a higher chance of being more accurate than just focusing on Ne base vs Ni base.

Im trying to understand the derivation between the other functions and the base

It seems to me that the base is where to start and then everything should just fall into place as a derivation afterwards.

Ne users focus on different possibilites. Because this is their main mode of viewing reality, they have to affect reality by changing themselves (hence Introverted creative). Base obtains picture of reality, Creative tries to obtain it?

If NeFi is using Ne then he will be seeking SiTe because when his Ne/Fi is on, he will be trying to conform internally himself to fit the possibility his intuitive Ne has given him.

But since he cant see a full picture of reality (since Se is in his role) he only understands how to change one half of himself (how he emotionally should feel in relation to reality) and not how to change the other half (what is Si? how he physically feels in relation to reality?). HA Te would be because while he understands intuitively the possibility to choose, his Ti is weak (because his Fi is strong?), therefore he cannot internally figure out the logic, and needs to view logic in terms of external surroundings rather than creating it himself?

sorry if this makes no sense

[anndelise]

Ne users focus on different possibilites. Because this is their main mode of viewing reality, they have to affect reality by changing themselves (hence Introverted creative).

Where did you get the idea that Ne users have to affect reality by changing themselves?
Ne is a type of info.
Fi is a type of info.
Ti is a type of info.
Processing a type of info says nothing about what we do to affect reality.

Base obtains picture of reality, Creative tries to obtain it?

Where did you get the idea that creative info elements try to obtain the base's picture of reality?
Creative info elements might be how we make contact, but that is different from it being the goal.

A Ti creative makes contact through his Ti.
An Fi creative makes contact through their Fi.
But that doesn't mean they must change themselves. It just means their contact is influenced by their creative/base.

If NeFi is using Ne then he will be seeking SiTe because when his Ne/Fi is on, he will be trying to conform internally himself to fit the possibility his intuitive Ne has given him.

NeFi are not rationals (T/F base types). They are irrationals. They are perceiving types, primarily focused on developing a picture of reality. This picture of reality is influenced by their affective orientation to what they see. And/or by the affective orientation of the object of focus to other objects. This is part of why they are called the Psychologist type. Because they use a 'client's' own affective orientation to help the Psychologist type build a clearer understanding of a situation, event, belief, etc. This in no way requires him to conform himself to fit anything.

Fi isn't Ti logic, but Fi has it's own logic. It's own way of making the mental connections that yield insight into the essence and quickly generates possibilities. This is why I referred you to HP cog style to help you understand the Ne of NeFi. And the CD cog style to help you understand the Ne of NeTi. If you can understand that NeFi build a holographicish image with the different views linked together by the subject's Fi orientations, then you'd have a clearer understanding of the Ne of NeFi, and what essences they see, and how they generate an idea of the possibilities/potential available.

All of this is geared towards building a mental model. Not in conforming themselves, and not in affecting reality.
This doesn't mean that they can't use this info to try changing themselves, nor to try influincing their world. But that is all different from processing information, which is what socionics categorizes.

[Beautiful sky]

Ne searches for new horizons out there Ni searches for possibile eminent even sitting on their couch scratching their heads. And having said this this is where consentingadults wants to make loooooove to me

[chemical]

A good rule of thumb - keep in mind that a Ne or Ni base has a strong Ni or Ne respectively. The difference is in what kind of information they're looking for, in some sense.

There are two sides to Ni, and depending on which side is more prominent, you see that more - one is introversion, and the other is dynamic. The idea linking the two I think is the sense in which you know there is a subject and hence subjective factors to cognition without any judgment and with only perception is through noting that a few moments later, the same apparent "object" can be seen differently. The image as it appears as fused with subjective psychic activity. That the source of all this imagery can be recognized to be one implies there is a subjective factor, and hence a subject.
In cognition, Ni imagery bleed into each other, and this bleeding is used constructively in a sense because it actively appeals to this subjective factor rather than suppressing it.

[Maker of helmets]

@ryoka14

I would like to try and answer this question.

Nes
ENTp
INTj
ENFp
INFj

Nis
ENTj
INTp
ENFj
INFp

I have been thinking of simpler ways to describe the types and functions, because I don't think many of the available descriptors are immediately accessible to comprehend at a level that is especially useful to the average person.

A major concern for Nes is openness to new possibilities, whereas a major concern for Nis is the discernment of transcendent meaning.

I think this may explain a lot about the manner of our respective thought patterns.

[The Foundation]

Ne readily perceives "potential" as many descriptions like to point out, but they tend to forego the idea that Ne sees everything in terms of "could become".

Ne's static nature manifests in the fact that they perceive essences in the first place. Ne types capture the momentary raw potential of an object (defined as a literal object, environment, etc.) and attempt to track every direction that object can go. What the object is able to become. An object, thus, is perceived as being powerful enough or having enough potential to become something more or to do something different than what it already is doing. The ILE, for example, is often recognized for their inventive capacities, in that they are able to recognize the potential of an object to become something else other than what it already is and what would be straightforwardly possible of the object (more along the lines of Se). The ILE may be able to look at a system like Socionics and capture the raw potential of the system as it is right now, and realize something new the system of Socionics can become with the right amount of leverage (Creative Element, Ti). Thus, there is the perception of two static objects. The first is an object's essence and raw potential, the second is the final state of an object after it achieves its potential. Ne types do not perceive the in-between stages of how an object's essence reaches the final state is a fluid, dynamic way. They see things in jumps.

Ne perception examples:

A person who is observably good at art -> Possibility to become a world renown artist under certain conditions

A system of knowledge that shows great promise in its meaning [capturing of essence] but is entirely unorganized and ambiguous -> With the right application of leverage (Creative Ti), we can make this system more articulate and thus more powerful in its assertions, allowing us to maybe convince those who do not already see the potential of this disorganized system.

A Fairly Large Cube -> We could chisel a throne-like chair out of it (Cube is able to become chair), or we could cut the corners away to make it more mobile and spherical (Cube is able to become sphere), or we could use it as a canvas for some innovative art (Cube is able to become a canvas).... ∞


Ni, contrarily, perceives the effects objects' essences have on the environment, and thus is more likely to observe the hidden, intangible effects produced by objects' fields (field being defined by the field in which an object affects its environment). The Ip perspective to which Ni belongs is characterized by the attitude of observation, so Ni works under the condition that the user is constantly observing the actions of objects and the presence or absence of objects. For the more ethically inclined white intuition, a simple action produced by a person, for instance, speaks hidden volumes and allows the observant to pick up on their rhythm, and perhaps what they will do next or the coming chain of events. The perception is an immediate response to an observation that runs deeper than what it actually appears to be. This is why Ni types are often considered forecasters, and are thought of as seers. It isn't so much that they just know what is going to happen in the future, it's the fact that they are able to perceive what is actually happening instead of what appears to be happening. It's easy to predict the future when observations of things scream what is coming next. This is also why Ni types tend to get into intellectual trouble with other types, as Ni types will often be perceiving information in the deeper context and will explain a system from what it is implying rather than what is actually being said by a system. They naturally look past the details and see what is happening, able to lock in onto the rhythm of systems or people and establish a baseline to create predictions from.

Ni perception examples:

(More Ni-Fe) A man is nervous and extremely anxious [observation] -> He is about to do something really stupid or is in a very tight situation in which he cannot escape easily [prediction]

A valuable chess piece has been moved to a vulnerable and strange position by an arguably good player -> Something else is at play, I need to be cautious. This isn't what it seems.

The almost always cheerful and jovial man suddenly turned cold and depressive from the reception and reading of a letter addressed to him -> If the man is always cheerful, and now he isn't because of a letter, then the letter must be something really bad to make him change moods so suddenly. (Still more Ni-Fe, but is obvious enough for a Ni-Te to pick up on)

Secondary Note:

Ni - perceiving the distortions in reality

[The Foundation]

An Added Hypothesis Here that I forgot to mention:

I am convinced that it is possible to differentiate Ne and Ni in individuals based on their worldviews.

Ne types look at new concepts and ideas through their previous collection of knowledge and information, keeping the same mental worldview and perspective for new information

Ni types absorb new concepts and ideas and attempt to perceive their collection of knowledge and information in the lens of the information. (How does this new information impact my perception of everything else I know?)

In this hypothesis:

Ne types are constantly adding on to their worldview with new ideas and concepts and attempting to distort outside information to fit their internal perspective of the world (it sounds like the rational/irrational dichotomy, but it fits in that Ne types are constantly comparing ideas to other ideas, and thus the input of new ideas triggers associations to older ideas. This means that information is sort of integrated with the mental contents and manipulated to fit inside of the tangles of associative information prior).

Ni types are constantly manipulating their own worldview through the addition of new ideas and concepts and attempt to see how the information they've known prior changes when viewed through the perspective of the new information (how does new information impact the understanding of old information?)


In Simpler Terms:

Ne types perceive new information in terms of what they already know. ("Oh, I see, this new concept is just like this other concept used over here in this field I know well")
Ni types (re)-perceive what they already know through the lens supplied by the addition of new information. ("Oh man, this new concept changes how I view every other concept I know in this field")

[Skepsis]

An Added Hypothesis Here that I forgot to mention:


Ni types are constantly manipulating their own worldview through the addition of new ideas and concepts and attempt to see how the information they've known prior changes when viewed through the perspective of the new information (how does new information impact the understanding of old information?)

Typology is actually an excellent way to exercise shifting perspectives. I often try and perceive the world as other people see it and what better way than changing the degree in which you use information elements. The trouble is you can actually fool yourself. For instance, using anything but your base function for an extended period of time may cause a change in how you view the world, which actually inhibits other elements. But such changes can only be temporal. The process will eventually become tiresome and the person will need to return to their base function.

If no one can relate to this, I think nearly all introverts may at least relate to feeling like they are more social than they actually are as some point in their life. One day, you decide, I can be social too dammit! I can be fun! So you go out, drink, socialize, and have a great time. You may even stagger home thinking how outgoing you really are but the next morning, the thought of being around people at all that day makes you ill. You've essentially returned to your base function, or comfort zone. So there was essentially a change in perspective, if only for an evening.

Beyond the world of cognitive functions though, being aware of an idea that challenges my perspective is enticing to me, as long as it better explains the world around me. While I am open to new possibilities, it has been a very gradual process that has allowed me to become more "open". But, that is because I've accepted the finitude of other people's perspectives, leaving me to conclude that relations are largely a result of what perspectives each person brings to the table. There are many ways to influence a person to get them to see your side, but for the most part, people are usually quite fixed in how they see things. For myself, I want to influence others by getting them to look at empirical data, otherwise I don't try to influence anyone.

[The Foundation]

Typology is actually an excellent way to exercise shifting perspectives. I often try and perceive the world as other people see it and what better way than changing the degree in which you use information elements. The trouble is you can actually fool yourself. For instance, using anything but your base function for an extended period of time may cause a change in how you view the world, which actually inhibits other elements. But such changes can only be temporal. The process will eventually become tiresome and the person will need to return to their base function.

If no one can relate to this, I think nearly all introverts may at least relate to feeling like they are more social than they actually are as some point in their life. One day, you decide, I can be social too dammit! I can be fun! So you go out, drink, socialize, and have a great time. You may even stagger home thinking how outgoing you really are but the next morning, the thought of being around people at all that day makes you ill. You've essentially returned to your base function, or comfort zone. So there was essentially a change in perspective, if only for an evening.

Beyond the world of cognitive functions though, being aware of an idea that challenges my perspective is enticing to me, as long as it better explains the world around me. While I am open to new possibilities, it has been a very gradual process that has allowed me to become more "open". But, that is because I've accepted the finitude of other people's perspectives, leaving me to conclude that relations are largely a result of what perspectives each person brings to the table. There are many ways to influence a person to get them to see your side, but for the most part, people are usually quite fixed in how they see things. For myself, I want to influence others by getting them to look at empirical data, otherwise I don't try to influence anyone.

I agree with and find this post incredibly insightful into the manifestations of functions that are not readily used often.

However, what I was specifically referring to was the absorption of ideas through Intuition.

Ne types have one view of everything they know, and keep piling on more concepts and ideas that they are learning to add to their trigger-associative web of information.

Ni types have several views of everything they know, through the perspective of different concepts and ideas that they are learning (new information creates a splash that shifts all other knowledge about).

Clarification:

Ne types are often referred to as being highly analogical due to their ability to capture the essences of things. "Oh, so this is just like (is basically like, is generally, etc) [insert perhaps more basic, prior learned concept here]." They are understanding new information quickly and efficiently by relating it back to concepts already known and determining similarities. Thus, new ideas are often learned in terms of old information.

Ni types have changing views of everything, on the other hand, and thus when they are approached with new concepts and ideas, they capture the idiosyncratic essence of them (through their effect on the user, what they seem to be like, or what they seem to be saying; "what is actually happening here"), and then with this new perspective look back on their prior knowledge to develop it further. This is why Ni types often go into highly specialized fields of knowledge, as new minor concepts and ideas proposed can radically change the mental perception of the entire system of information, whereas the Ne types would simply see the new minor concepts and ideas in terms of the older information, and thus as an addition.