A Simple Definition of Ni That Works

[Spermatozoa]

I just defined Ni and Ne for you all here.

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...=1#post1237294

[Bertrand]

Ne about what could be in general and without respect to space or time because it has to do with rearranging the overall mental picture. in other words whether the dress is blue or black can be Ne but so is whether it will rain tomorow or god will piss on us all. Se is more about your options in space at any given moment

[Stellafera]

yes but I don't think you realize that "time" captures it better not worse, so to do away with it and replace it with this paltry description actually harms people's understanding not improves it. if you can see events occuring across 5 dimensions x,y,z coordinates + T (4d) + the collective unconscious (5d), your understanding is enriched. this thread's way of understanding actually understates it. its the same problem all functions have when being written by people without a complete understanding of them. there's this idea that IEE wants to honor everyone's experience. this is not doing that. its reducing out the complexity of the functions on both the Ti and Ni planes, which is sort of antithetical to what socionics exists to do, which is to promote human understanding and extend oneself, not simply lower the bar. anyone can do that all on their own

the bottom line is not that this isn't cognizable in someone's mind-- its that its inaccurate compared to other descriptions. IEE can imagine any context wherein whatever they say is perfect. in pointing out one possible interpretation that is valid you have not established that it is the one worth striving toward. inasmuch as it announces mission accomplished, it is wrong

if it was "Ni may be conceptualized as time, but if you have a hard time with that think of it as... ...this is not the most robust definition but it may fill the void with something rather than nothing" that would be a more honest portrayal of the way in which it "works." maybe a line about how we could all stand to deepen our understanding and to continue trying to improve would be merited



is just straight up wrong and misleading, at least to the second part



its just stupid because the more you flesh it out the more you just define time while explicitly trying to exclude it. so its like you can continue to read into all the ways in which it doesn't fail with respect to time, until you've brought them together again. its like why bother. keep them separate, you lose something. bring them together, it was pure duplication of effort with nothing added

we've got the Thinking-polr-ception going

I see it the other way around... "time" to me feels like a very one-note process, very literal, a thing that just sort of exists. Time, unlike casuality, doesn't have any inherent meaning. It's just the forward march of moments, minutes, hours. It's not even "things happening". It's just time happening. It doesn't have an agenda.

People don't die because they "get old", they die because their bodies stop working. People don't discover new technologies because of the forward march of "progress", they discover new technologies by playing around with existing facets of the universe. Time is just the dimension that casuality operates within.

I feel like we're discussing the same topics under different definitions...

[lavos]

[Aramas]

ITT: Bertrand tries to discredit an idea he didn't come up with because he can't take credit for thinking of it. xD

c29c029e7e43eb6d2c1323ad1ff2ec4bfe607ede.jpg

Bad Bertrand. Go play with your Ti.

[Spermatozoa]

Bad Bertrand. Go play with your Ti.

I am sure that some big-breasted, motherly Fe type will clasp him to her bosom and nurture it.

That reminds me of this gif:

[Bertrand]

ya'll are idiots

[Desert Financial]

Since deals with evolving processes, trends, and future plans, time factors into the intuitive stream of thought.

It may not be measured. Measurements may be entirely implicit or peripheral.

But, realistically, an imagining of time has to be involved. I think some discrepancies regarding the issue of defining stems from confusion about whether the perception of time is really accurate.

Just keep in mind that since it's subjective, it's fallible. But don't think that it can't be accurate, either. That would almost be like saying that can't be accurate about the potential it sees in various things.

Measurements and distinct benchmarks come into focus when rational functions make distinctions about the intuitive content.

As an example, I knew an IEI who noticed patterns and relationships with the people she knew. Later in life, when her creative function and mobilizing function surfaced more, she started to systematize her perceptions according to different dates.

[consentingadult]

When did you reinvent the wheel? And yes, I prefer modern wheels over wagon wheels. I wouldn't want to get on the interstate with a car that has wagon wheels on it. Reinventing the wheel can be very useful.

But if you do, do it right, so that it really makes sense:

http://mavericksocionics.blogspot.nl...hat-is-ne.html
http://mavericksocionics.blogspot.nl...hat-is-ni.html
http://mavericksocionics.blogspot.nl...fi-and-fe.html

[Aramas]

But if you do, do it right, so that it really makes sense:

http://mavericksocionics.blogspot.nl...hat-is-ne.html
http://mavericksocionics.blogspot.nl...hat-is-ni.html
http://mavericksocionics.blogspot.nl...fi-and-fe.html

Is this your website? The part about Ne's association with essentialism, constructionism, and constructivism seems a bit politicized to me.

[Desert Financial]

Your first statement is a tautology. You're just using synonyms and related terms to try to make a seemingly logical statement that follows. What you're essentially saying is that, "Since Ni deals with time, Ni deals with time."

And?

All logical conclusions practically amount to tautology. You don't arrive at any new knowledge from them.

[Bertrand]

right, the whole battle is not over that they're definitions but rather what definition is better and why and it has to do with how time is nested within larger bodies of knowledge so it brings more to the table

[Exodus]

In the process of reading a lot of different definitions of Ni and finding them to be lacking, I decided to come up with my own definition that worked better than anything else I've found. It describes the style of communication I've seen in Ni types, and I think works well to see how they think without making Ni into some mysterious, mystical, or possibly even "superior" function.

Without further introduction, Ni is most simply this: an awareness of the process underlying a string of mental associations.

Ne, contrarily, is aware of the content of the mental associations themselves.

Cat, bat, rat, frog, dog, fog, etc.

That's an example of a chain of mental associations. Ne sees each one of those individually and recognizes them for what they are, their identities as things and concepts in themselves.

This is essentially true, but it leaves a lot of questions unanswered. Like what does this tell us about the relationship of Se with Ni vs. Se with Ne? Etc. If you follow the implications you will most likely be led to something like Model A2.

[Bertrand]

I would also like to say if the motive was to demystify Ni because its become too puffed up from the point of view of prestige, I totally agree and the "cult of Ni" is bullshit, but I don't even think the real Ni egos are the ones most behind it

I actually think realizing it pertains to time serves to remove a lot of the prestige because now its no longer magic, its about gambling and trying to create self fulfilling prophecies by seeding ideas in people's heads. the time component has been captured in large part by Ti, and everyone has access to the time component wrt their base function. so the social cult around Ni is stupid to the extreme, because half the people posting "spooky Ni" images are just stupid and off base, but de-linking it from time is the exact opposite solution to this kind of problem. if anything they should be exposed as the charlatans they are, so we can get free of a lot of that bullshit

[Aramas]

This is essentially true, but it leaves a lot of questions unanswered. Like what does this tell us about the relationship of Se with Ni vs. Se with Ne? Etc. If you follow the implications you will most likely be led to something like Model A2.

The relationship between Se and Ni is that Se is the function that, when it comes into contact with Ni, begins a certain stream of thought or chain of association. An interaction with Se can also influence the direction of a chain of associations after it has already been initiated. That influence is the thing Ni dominant types are least aware of when they are still growing. It's like a blindspot. To make an analogy, dropping a pebble (Se) into a pond causes waves of energy (Ni) to move through the water.

I've never heard of Model A2. Maybe you can introduce me.

The inverse relationship between Ni and Se is that chains of association can coalescence into an endpoint leading to an impulse. Se dominant types are unaware of how they are affected by different chains of association. Another analogy: the pebble can cause waves of energy to move through water, but water currents can also move a pebble.

The problem with opposing elements is that they are unrelated in their impact on each other. Advice given on the basis of one element assumes that the element it's speaking to is the inverse element that corresponds to its own job. So problems of conflict are essentially problems of unrelatedness. Se and Ni influence each other in this kind of back and forth arrangement of feedback and development, but Se and Ne don't do that.

This is why people are always giving you advice meant for their duals without realizing it lol.

And this is where unhealthy Socionics types come from: without an awareness of the impact of the DS function one essentially becomes unaware of himself and acts unconsciously. He becomes more easily influenced by the phantoms of his own mind and other people.

[Exodus]

The relationship between Se and Ni is that Se is the function that, when it comes into contact with Ni, begins a certain stream of thought or chain of association. An interaction with Se can also influence the direction of a chain of associations after it has already been initiated. That influence is the thing Ni dominant types are least aware of when they are still growing. It's like a blindspot. To make an analogy, dropping a pebble (Se) into a pond causes waves of energy (Ni) to move through the water.

Again this is close to my interpretation of the elements -- there is a precise definition hidden here somewhere

I've never heard of Model A2. Maybe you can introduce me.

https://wholesocionics.herokuapp.com...low-in-Model-A
https://wholesocionics.herokuapp.com...ts-in-Model-A2

The problem with opposing elements is that they are unrelated in their impact on each other. Advice given on the basis of one element assumes that the element it's speaking to is the inverse element that corresponds to its own job. So problems of conflict are essentially problems of unrelatedness. Se and Ni influence each other in this kind of back and forth arrangement of feedback and development, but Se and Ne don't do that.

This is why people are always giving you advice meant for their duals without realizing it lol.

My sense is that conflicting elements actually do get in each other's way rather than simply being irrelevant. Irrelevant information is something you can ignore and won't produce conflict.

[Aramas]

Again this is close to my interpretation of the elements -- there is a precise definition hidden here somewhere



https://wholesocionics.herokuapp.com...low-in-Model-A
https://wholesocionics.herokuapp.com...ts-in-Model-A2



My sense is that conflicting elements actually do get in each other's way rather than simply being irrelevant. Irrelevant information is something you can ignore and won't produce conflict.

Yeah I was just thinking about that problem. Haven't quite worked it out yet with absolute certainty. Sometimes things are not what they seem. I think it's possible that information elements don't impede each other, but people do impede each other when they don't get what they need or want, if that makes sense. With a lack of exchange across the necessary elements, someone does something unexpected, and this causes a use of force of some kind to stop the other person's functioning, because they expected a certain kind of response that wasn't given. So it's not the information elements that are opposed stopping each other but rather the people themselves doing it repeatedly when trying to rectify a miscommunication.

The reason unhealth could come into existence is then a repeated force unrelated to Socionics along with a lack of elemental influence that would lead to a positive organization of ego functions.

There's also the possibility of untoward influence on an unconscious function, say an Se type interacting with an Ne type:

Se -> Si -> Ne
The Se influence interrupts the unconscious base process from which Ne derives itself.

[Nehtaro]

I see it the other way around... "time" to me feels like a very one-note process, very literal, a thing that just sort of exists. Time, unlike casuality, doesn't have any inherent meaning. It's just the forward march of moments, minutes, hours. It's not even "things happening". It's just time happening. It doesn't have an agenda.
[....] Time is just the dimension that casuality operates within.

Perfect.

[Bertrand]

thats like saying space is just the dimension objects operate within, which is true, but its like you say that as if space is de minimus, when it is the sine qua non of the very thing which you privilege. causation requires a time component, to say its "just" the dimension causality operates in makes it out to be dispensable when it exists logically prior to causation itself. to say time doesn't have meaning is just to admit to missing the point while in the same breath profess the triumph of doing so

its like we're back to "world is flat--makes u think" like its the perspective from some moral high ground, when it hasn't even established the bare minimum to be taken seriously

[Singu]

thats like saying space is just the dimension objects operate within, which is true, but its like you say that as if space is de minimus, when it is the sine qua non of the very thing which you privilege. causation requires a time component, to say its "just" the dimension causality operates in makes it out to be dispensable when it exists logically prior to causation itself. to say time doesn't have meaning is just to admit to missing the point while in the same breath profess the triumph of doing so

This has got to be the dumbest thing I've ever read.

Hey Bertrand, guess what? You'll need to understand physics to understand time. You don't understand physics. Now go back to your "philosophy".

Anyone who understands physics will know that what was just written is complete, total and utter bullshit. It's just a bunch of totally incoherent, convoluted nonsense with deliberate confusing syntax and fractured sentence structure.

I would STRONGLY advice anyone to not listen to anything Bertrand says, because this man is a charlatan on a psychopathic level. He clearly writes things just to impress his readers, but his posts often have little to no content.

I want to make this my last post. Bye.

[Bertrand]

alright smell ya later

[consentingadult]

Is this your website? The part about Ne's association with essentialism, constructionism, and constructivism seems a bit politicized to me.

define 'politicized'. You seem to be good at words that can mean anything.

[Exodus]

thats like saying space is just the dimension objects operate within, which is true, but its like you say that as if space is de minimus, when it is the sine qua non of the very thing which you privilege. causation requires a time component, to say its "just" the dimension causality operates in makes it out to be dispensable when it exists logically prior to causation itself.

Actually many would say that time is "made up of" causation - it's the structure of causation that produces the illusion of time flowing. Without things happening (like the change of states in @Aramas's example), there is no way to measure the passage of time. It effectively doesn't exist.

[Bertrand]

of course you can find a context in which "time" is meaningless the point is if you do so where does that leave you

[Aramas]

define 'politicized'. You seem to be good at words that can mean anything.

Social constructionism is an idea that's often associated with modern liberal ideology, especially third wave feminism, while essentialism is often associated with political conservatism. This is true in the USA. I can't tell you how many times I've known college professors in the humanities profess social constructionism along with their other liberal beliefs. It's difficult to find someone these days who is a humanities professor and who supports or defends the idea of essentialism. I managed to find one example online, but that's all. Even the ones who are deeply skeptical about today's sociopolitical sphere like Camille Paglia tend to be constructionists.

[Bertrand]

political statements are just psychological statements so everything is politicized to the extent every value implies a better or worse policy in recognition of it. so it seems like an empty critique to call something politicized, its like duh, the point is to point out in which way, how, and to what end. if Ne is "politicized" it just means it had a perspective cast across it with all the implications that go along with adopting that perspective. Believe it or not Ni is politicized in this very thread in the very same way. Like I said though to say such things are trivial in regards to the question of "how to choose" because the idea that you could eliminate "politicization" is 1) not possible 2) itself just another pernicious mode of political advocacy that simply lacks self awareness. In any case it is an illusory insight because it tells us very little as to how to proceed, beyond acting as a "request" for clarification. That's what IEE tends to fail to understand about itself, it purports to offer clarity when it only tends to offer confusion, clarity only comes in response to their "request" which comes in the form of the introduction of their own particular brand of chaos. its interesting to me that they see themselves as these sages when its more like kids wandering around breaking stuff without appreciating how. When safety precautions are applied they're like "I did that!" its like, yeah I guess but its not really a compliment because you created the harm it was implemented to prevent

the main thing is they exist to drum up temporary interest so their duals have something to apply themselves toward, lest they die of boredom, but their effort is misdirected when its not confined to creating excitement for their duals. the rest of the world just sees that as them creating problems and they don't enjoy fixing them if it wasn't really ever necessary to begin with. in other words, not everyone finds imagined problems to be exciting, they'd rather focus on the real ones first

[Aramas]

political statements are just psychological statements so everything is politicized to the extent every value implies a better or worse policy in recognition of it. so it seems like an empty critique to call something politicized, its like duh, the point is to point out in which way, how, and to what end. if Ne is "politicized" it just means it had a perspective cast across it with all the implications that go along with adopting that perspective. Believe it or not Ni is politicized in this very thread in the very same way. Like I said though to say such things are trivial in regards to the question of "how to choose" because the idea that you could eliminate "politicization" is 1) not possible 2) itself just another pernicious mode of political advocacy that simply lacks self awareness. In any case it is an illusory insight because it tells us very little as to how to proceed, beyond acting as a "request" for clarification. That's what IEE tends to fail to understand about itself, it purports to offer clarity when it only tends to offer confusion, clarity only comes in response to their "request" which comes in the form of the introduction of their own particular brand of chaos. its interesting to me that they see themselves as these sages when its more like kids wandering around breaking stuff without appreciating how. When safety precautions are applied they're like "I did that!" its like, yeah I guess but its not really a compliment because you created the harm it was implemented to prevent

I don't think politics and Socionics are necessarily related. You'll find people of different political beliefs in every quadra.

[Bertrand]

im sure by your idiosyncratic definitions and bizarre context shifting thats probably true. I guess the real question is why should anyone care what you think

[Aramas]

im sure by your idiosyncratic definitions and bizarre context shifting thats probably true. I guess the real question is why should anyone care what you think

Because I'm right?

Really I'm just putting my own observations out there and letting other people decide for themselves whether they agree with their experiences or not. It's really up to each individual. If you don't care, that's fine. Getting upset and following me around on the forum to try to "correct" me when I don't believe you isn't going to work though lol. Your posts make little to no sense to a lot of people, Bertrand, including me. You don't pay any attention to how you communicate your ideas to others. That's why nobody thinks of you as anything but a crank. You would do well to improve your communication skills.

[Bertrand]

I care in a negative way, the point is that inasmuch as you spread misinformation and confusion you need a balancing act. So no, I don't think I'll stop.

[Aramas]

I care in a negative way, the point is that inasmuch as you spread misinformation and confusion you need a balancing act. So no, I don't think I'll stop.

Supervise me, Mr. LII! I've been a bad boy!

doughboy.jpg


Anyway, if anyone else has any constructive posts they'd like to add to the discussion, I welcome them here. In spite of the constant derailing, I still want to see some posts that have something to do with the OP. If anyone has anything to add that either agrees or disagrees, let's hear it.

[Bertrand]

that raises the question what the fuck hotelambush is doing if hes supposed to be supervisor

[Aylen]

I care in a negative way, the point is that inasmuch as you spread misinformation and confusion you need a balancing act. So no, I don't think I'll stop.

I don't really care about being offensive as much as I care about the mental health of some people on this forum. I do keep in mind they are not just disembodied text and some are just barely out of childhood. Sure we get bumps and bruises but if you see a child, for example, about to fall off a cliff you might just reach out and grab them.

We are all agents of karma, good or bad, in some form or another. One action can avert a disaster or create one. I prefer to be aware of what the consequences of my actions will be. I usually am. If something I say balances something you say, or vice versa, therefore neutralizing the impact of it I call it a win for both of us, since we each expressed ourselves, authentically. Although I can only speak for myself on this.

how caregiverish

Yeah, ok. They say imitation is the sincerest form of flattery... I just feel copied considering you called me a caregiver for saying the same thing to you.



I suppose you will find a way to weasel out of this unless you just don't care.

[Velvet]

I haven't read everything but Ni in my understanding is everywhere.... it's just that it's very quiet... you have an idea... it flows into something else.... it's like a necklace, every pearl has its place... and then it's WHOAAAAHHHH and it's the start of something else... and everything is connected.

[The Reality Denialist]

When it gets creative then it starts to pick up potentials from environment and direct situations somewhere to attain hidden agenda.

You are not gonna fool me although it is way more sophisticated than suggestive/mobilizing.

[Slade]

@Aramas, thanks for the post. I have been coming to similar conclusions about Ni. I have a few questions:

Without further introduction, Ni is most simply this: an awareness of the process underlying a string of mental associations.

Ne, contrarily, is aware of the content of the mental associations themselves.

Cat, bat, rat, frog, dog, fog, etc.

That's an example of a chain of mental associations. Ne sees each one of those individually and recognizes them for what they are, their identities as things and concepts in themselves.

Ni is a process-oriented function that observes such a chain of association as the one I listed above, and it understands why one association often leads to the next. Rather than focusing on associations, it focuses on the process of how people make associations. This awareness of how people make associations often results for many Ni-oriented writers in what's called a stream of consciousness style, the king of which was James Joyce. (Read Finnegan's Wake or Ulysses to understand Ni. Remember that it's Ni + Fe. Jose Saramago will give you the Ni + Te version.)

Any definition that says that Ni predicts the future is wrong. Ni is not about predicting the future or about time. Time is just an analogy for the abstractness of Ni, because Ni is the most abstract function that exists. People who define Ni as an understanding of time or the passage thereof have gotten lost in the analogy. Each function has predictive ability depending on its dimensionality, but this predictive ability comes only from past experience and is dependent on that.

Te is about facts, Ti how we arrive at those facts, Se is about sensations and the most concrete aspects of thought (the signs that refer to the symbols), and Si is about the process of sensation itself and an awareness of how people sense things.

So there you go folks. No more mystery.

Just for clarity's sake, I would like a little more differentiation between Ti and Ni. have found that these two elements suffer greatly from being misunderstood for each other. I have a rough understanding of what you mean by mental associations, but would you be able to more distinctly phrase that in a way that differs from Ti? What came to mind for me was conceptual associations, but that doesn't feel quite right. The goal would be, for me, to clearly delineate what Ni's playing field is as opposed to Ti.

The difference that I can think of here is pattern identification, and if this is the case then any integral definition of Ni needs to make reference to patterns that have occurred over time. Going with this line of thought, it wouldn't be possible to separate Ni from time. Considering how it works with Se, I think it would be difficult to argue otherwise.

Also, some things that I believe are tied to Ni : Beliefs, self awareness, time, philosophical outlook. inner world, imagination, symbolism.

After getting at that base definition, would you mind at giving a try as to connect that core explanation to these other branching ideas that seem connected to Ni? It would be helpful in getting a holistic interpretation.

I think people interpret Ni as having future-predictive capacity because some Ni types choose to look at societal-level associations that people are making, and often make predictions about how those social chains of association will lead people to certain beliefs and attitudes. These beliefs and attitudes might cause people to act in certain ways, thus making history, but it isn't the same as reading the future. It's more or less just reading the social chain of cognitive associations and seeing how that might develop with their dominant function. This assumes that people are the ones who make history, though, and it often ignores how nature influences history (no Si, perhaps?). But the other functions do this too in different ways. Rather than looking at social-level chains of association that exist in some collective mind, the other functions do similar tasks in different domains.O

Would you give an example? The example that I am looking for would give the prediction ( conclusion) and then how an Ni type would reach that conclusion through deconstruction of those associations

Association --) Belief ---) Future prediction is probably how it works

Future Prediction --) Beliefs ---) Association Would probably be how it looks in an Ni types mind. (?)

I'm looking for this, basically in a concrete, tangible example form since it seems this is how you are describing it works (which I agree with).

[WinnieW]

My take on this is:
Intuition is a perception function (both and ). Patterns pop out of the blue and you have to be in a relaxed mood to gain access to the informations.
The difference might be that is a directional stream of pattern, and has more directions and is not consecutive.

Thinking is a judging function. It is an active process you can control with your willpower, I'd it call it mindwork. Member of all types have at least a conscious thinking function ( or )

[Aramas]

@Aramas, thanks for the post. I have been coming to similar conclusions about Ni. I have a few questions:




Just for clarity's sake, I would like a little more differentiation between Ti and Ni. have found that these two elements suffer greatly from being misunderstood for each other. I have a rough understanding of what you mean by mental associations, but would you be able to more distinctly phrase that in a way that differs from Ti? What came to mind for me was conceptual associations, but that doesn't feel quite right. The goal would be, for me, to clearly delineate what Ni's playing field is as opposed to Ti.

The difference that I can think of here is pattern identification, and if this is the case then any integral definition of Ni needs to make reference to patterns that have occurred over time. Going with this line of thought, it wouldn't be possible to separate Ni from time. Considering how it works with Se, I think it would be difficult to argue otherwise.

Also, some things that I believe are tied to Ni : Beliefs, self awareness, time, philosophical outlook. inner world, imagination, symbolism.

After getting at that base definition, would you mind at giving a try as to connect that core explanation to these other branching ideas that seem connected to Ni? It would be helpful in getting a holistic interpretation.



Would you give an example? The example that I am looking for would give the prediction ( conclusion) and then how an Ni type would reach that conclusion through deconstruction of those associations

Association --) Belief ---) Future prediction is probably how it works

Future Prediction --) Beliefs ---) Association Would probably be how it looks in an Ni types mind. (?)

I'm looking for this, basically in a concrete, tangible example form since it seems this is how you are describing it works (which I agree with).

I was thinking of lots of different kinds of associations. There are visual associations, auditory associations, verbal and linguistic associations, kinaesthetic associations, etc. Any sort of "this makes me think of that" arrangement is what I mean by Ni. Also, associations can go between different forms; that is, that you can have a sensory association that makes you think of an idea, or one idea can make you think of another idea. Make sure to note that I do not refer to the content of those associations in themselves as being Ni; the process underlying what makes those associations follow a certain pattern is what I refer to when I say Ni.

The information elements are all related in a sense, because the conclusions of one information element inform the others. For this reason, it can be difficult at times to tease them apart. A person's associations can guide his use of logic to come to a conclusion and say that something is a fact. But Ti is more about a test of internal consistency when looking at something. The conclusions Ti says are along the lines of, "This coheres," or "This makes sense." A pattern of association does not necessarily have to make sense or cohere, even for the person experiencing it. It can do so, but it isn't requisite. While the intuitive functions can have an indirect influence on what we see as facts, the logical functions have a direct influence on what we judge as fact.

As a Ti PoLR individual, whose Ti does not even adhere to social norms, compared to a Ti dominant guy I knew (LII), I have found that he simply could not understand how I worked internally, what my decision-making process was, and he told me upfront that he was, "Trying to figure me out." To him, I simply did not make sense, my behavior from one moment to the next "did not follow." It's probably a bit more difficult for me to describe Ti due to being Ti PoLR, but I'm doing the best I can at the moment. I can say, though, that it felt extremely uncomfortable for him to look at me in such a way that made me feel that he was, "Trying to figure me out," or analyze me, pick me apart, and try to understand me.

With regard to your understanding of Ni, and its supposed relationship with time, I would say that most things in the universe we experience happen within time, if not all. We think in time and space, we feel in time and space, we sense in time and space, and we intuit in time and space. There is nothing special about Ni and its relationship with time. All the other functions also have a relationship with time, and this is what is meant when an information element is said to be "4-dimensional," that is, that the person using an information element has a understanding of how it develops and changes over time. You can have 4D with any information element, so there's no special or unique relationship between Ni and time that does not exist for the other information elements.

Beliefs and self-awareness are definitely tied to Ni. However, I would argue that beliefs and self-awareness are macro-ideas that are usually, almost always, composed of judgments that we make on the basis of all the functions and information elements operating together to apprehend and perceive reality. Symbolism, if anything, is probably the one thing you mentioned that has a direct and close relationship specifically with Ni, at least from my perspective. That relationship exists because a symbol is really an associational stream (Ni) initiated/triggered by the perception of a sign, which is necessarily a concrete form (Se).

The concrete example I gave in the first post is a concrete example of Ni and Ne. Each individual idea in the sentence was an example of Ne: the dog, the frog, etc. Ni would be aware of the fact that the ideas there came in a chain because they were related somehow in the person's mind. These associations can be common associations, like the association between cat and dog, or they can be associations that relate to the sound of the word, like dog and frog. That is a very basic, very simple example of an associational chain. I suspect that they can become much more complex than that.

One great example of Ni in action can be found in someone who understands Ni but has a distinct lack of Ne. So, you could look at an individual who was an Se creative type to understand how Ni works by itself. I remember learning about Georgia O'Keeffe. She was really famous for some of the abstract artwork that she did. Her comments about that were that she had no idea what those abstractions meant, but that they simply came from her subconscious mind. She had an awareness of Ni that understood where and how those abstractions (or associations) came into being, at least to some small degree, but she did not know what they meant or signified. That's probably one of the best examples I can give of Ni independent of Ne.

If you want a better understanding of Ni, @Slade, it might also be good to look into the study that's called semiotics.

Wiki link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semiotics

[Bertrand]

Aramas I think you just fundamentally don't understand what time is, so you've sort of erased it from your lexicon and filled in the gaps. Its just a personal statement on how you understand intuition to function, which excludes time as a concept in relating to itself. Associations are Ne, but the meaningfulness of the connection between them is Ni, and that expresses itself through Time

you see this a lot in stoner philosophy where people will say stuff like "time doesn't matter only causality does" without realizing causality relies on time and to even take the meaning of "causality" for what it presently is implicates a development in time that you would deny by your statements. Its like the definition of Ni ignoring, the problem is we didn't get to where we are now in a vacuum, so this kind of retrospective analysis attacks things from the wrong end, it purports to move things forward but it cuts things off at the knees. the insight is illusory and is predicated precisely on ignoring the time axis in order to create "moment", its aimed at generating interest for those who don't value time (for everyone who does, they experience this alternatively as tension), and in keeping with that, has little value in light of time. its aimed at the base Si of SLI. Its why IEE, moreso than probably any other type, needs to take a history of western philosophy course if they want to be taken seriously, because Ni ignoring can be a fatal liability without a rigorous Ti framework to hedge it within

repetition is at the core of meaning, and it occurs in time

[hatchback176]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clive_Wearing

"Wearing developed a profound case of total amnesia as a result of his illness. Because of damage to the hippocampus, an area required to transfer memories from short-term to long-term memory, he is completely unable to form lasting new memories – his memory only lasts between 7 and 30 seconds.^[2] He spends every day 'waking up' every 20 seconds, 'restarting' his consciousness once the time span of his short term memory elapses (about 30 seconds)."

"appears in the 2006 documentary series Time, where his case is used to illustrate the effect of losing one's perception of time."

Repetition is at the core of meaning, and it occurs in time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recall_(memory)

There is all the room in the universe for leads to make coherent associations if they would simply organize themselves to use multiple levels of description. You have to stop being afraid of the complexity if you want to carry your insight forward.
http://www.xenodochy.org/gs/coa.html

As an lead I am certainly only experiencing tension with Aramas definition. People like Dario Nardi made it really simple to begin talking about brain activity and the thought processs in terms of the information elements. Aramas isn't even close https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHJDESShlyo