I just defined Ni and Ne for you all here.
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...=1#post1237294
I just defined Ni and Ne for you all here.
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...=1#post1237294
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
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...
Phobic So/Sp 6w7 3w2 9w1
Bit of a comic books nerd, bit of a fashion nerd, a lot of a generalized nerd
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.
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.
Last edited by Desert Financial; 11-22-2017 at 03:34 AM.
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
“I have never tried that before, so I think I should definitely be able to do that.” --- Pippi Longstocking
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
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
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.
Last edited by Aramas; 11-22-2017 at 07:46 PM.
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-AI've never heard of Model A2. Maybe you can introduce me.
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.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.
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.
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
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.
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.
of course you can find a context in which "time" is meaningless the point is if you do so where does that leave you
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.
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
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.
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.
that raises the question what the fuck hotelambush is doing if hes supposed to be supervisor
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.
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
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.
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.
MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
Winning is for losers
Sincerely yours,
idiosyncratic type
Life is a joke but do you have a life?
Joinif you dare https://matrix.to/#/#The16Types:matrix.org
@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).
Hey, feel free to PM me with any opinions about my type
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 )
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
Last edited by Aramas; 11-23-2017 at 10:59 PM.
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
Last edited by Bertrand; 11-24-2017 at 02:12 AM.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clive_Wearing
Repetition is at the core of meaning, and it occurs in time."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."
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