@Kara, I see that you value Ni.
I, myself, see things in the real world, but they seem to have a fogginess about them, as if they were overlaid with multiple possible futures. The things themselves still seem to predominate, but their potentialities are right there.
My function stack is:
4D Te
3D Ni
2D Se
1D Fi.
You probably have 4D Ni, since you do it much better than I do.
You also write very well.
I understand what you mean by that, it's a good way to put that type of fog you are writing about, and how the possibilities connect to it. Also, I'm sure, @Myst will find your post very interesting too, seeing how Ni creative with Te (at least it seemed to me she is really interested in understanding how Ni works too). I find it very interesting, how it makes sense with the picture of the visionary LIE, seeing possibilities, and have a good sense about future happenings.Originally Posted by Adam Strange
(I also forgot to mention in my previous post, that I can get very focued on the Ti aspects too, when I think something might be missing from a context or a structure of reasoning, or I get scared how a small mistake (based on my personal logic) can lead to a really huge problem later. Then I get very nit-picky, and I don't like, when someone refuses to address issues and logical fallacies in a conversation.)
I'm still not sure if I'm EIE-Ni or IEI, but I'll slowly get there to figure it out.
And thank you for your kind words!
Wow that's so interesting, I've heard Beta NF describe it like that before, except with people instead of things - people who always have this fogginess. A lot of those potentials, abstract variables and whatever.
@Kara do you have it like that, objects (people in your case I guess) overlaid that way with the foggy possible potentialities/futures, or is there any difference for you?
Hahah I am too predictable.
Maybe this kind of investigation will help with the typing too(I also forgot to mention in my previous post, that I can get very focued on the Ti aspects too, when I think something might be missing from a context or a structure of reasoning, or I get scared how a small mistake (based on my personal logic) can lead to a really huge problem later. Then I get very nit-picky, and I don't like, when someone refuses to address issues and logical fallacies in a conversation.)
I'm still not sure if I'm EIE-Ni or IEI, but I'll slowly get there to figure it out.
I actually hardly have either, so that's why I found it interesting lol. I especially don't have the version with the conscious information much, just sometimes a little. And the "just knowing" part I don't really trust on its own by default so I don't notice it much / forget about it easily.It is interesting to me how there is no difference then in your case, if I interpreted it correctly. Basically both of these are "just knowing", but one is the product of the conclusion of information elements, you only skip the whole elements part from time to time, the other one is a product of random symbols popping up, and you giving meaning to them.
I have this with logic maybe... I can see every logical variable in one and don't focus on all the details just the logical feel that I get from it that's immediately a conclusion too. Then I can extract reasoning if I want to, or dissect it all if the quick conclusion doesn't take care of everything, and that's a more laborious and conscious process but easily made verbal. And the third mode for me is when it's about a very familiar, well processed topic, so I can make snap conclusions/judgments, even if it's a complex topic. First mode I guess has limits in that it can't handle complex topics that cannot be "visible" all in one and second mode is needed to get through that then.Think of these as:
2. There is a guy, let's call him Adrian. Adrian often has a facial expression like this, Adrian wears clothes like that, Adrian once made a noise like this or that, when someone was talking, also, hey, there is Suzy, whom I can see around Adrian, and I already know Suzy is an X and Y type of person. Sometimes these small elements and details don't become realized in my head - I am only left with one big impression - that Adrian is a douchebag. Or Adrian is a really nice person. Or Adrian is afraid of heights. Or whatever. Basically, it often feels like that even though I realize and know about different information elements, I just... somehow even as I know about them, I forget some of them, or glance over them, and what is stronger in me is the actual final conclusion and impression, and because of that I sometimes have to go back and analyze what lead me to that in the very beginning.
1. Imagine going into a forest, where you find a golden feather (this is the more ambigious part, I guess the Ni), and you start to think, "hm, what is this golden feather?", and then you are like "ah, I used to have a golden bird, when I was small... but why should I think about my childhood right now, why does this golden feather want to remind me of that ?" And then you go down and down, trying to find the connections, or make a coherent structure, until you snap out of that picture, there is no forest anymore and no golden feather. You are left with the what triggered the forest and the golden feather, let's call it situation X, and the childhood association.
So there you go - situation X had to do something with your childhood, and whatever you understood from it, voilá.
3. And sometimes, when I speak to people, they mention something, and it seems there is no even process anywhere, I just immediately have this click - Oh, yes, he does this, because 20 years ago he <insert>, his family was like <insert>, and now he is desperately <insert>. But sometimes it still misses these elements I wrote down for you, until I give a bit of time.*
Basically, the impresson comes first, then the details that would explain the impression.
*Almost like, they are there, I see them, but they are still... in a kind of fog? It can happen to me sometimes, that I am left with impression, and even when somebody explained something to me with the actual elements, I focus so much on the overall impression, that the details are hiding behind this fog, and sometimes I even forget about them.
Btw the picture either way easily has both logical and other details. The whole picture thing in the first mode has concrete details that can either be just sensory or details that actually have a defined concrete quality (not simply sensations) and same for the more detailed processing too I guess.
I don't actually get into memories like you doYes, I think this is similar to what I was trying to describe. Almost like following an old memory or a light déja vu.but yeah. Your above example with the golden feather, uh, I cannot ever do that at will, or detailed or anything.
I mean, I can do this "why should I think about my childhood right now, why does this golden feather want to remind me of that ?", when I did already analyse out (see: dissect) an emotional topic* for myself and if the thing is within that topic specifically. Otherwise noooo.
*: And that dissecting-analysing such stuff takes forever
They were random and arbitrary, in the sense that they were mostly pulling generic stuff from say, books about dream interpretation lol. Sometimes that stuff matches a bit but usually not, imo. At least in my case.I'm wondering if they were really random and arbitrary, or it just seemed like that, compared to the structure you've already built (no offense). It happened to me sometimes, that people felt what I was talking about was arbitrary and didn't make too much sense, some cases I think they just didn't want to face something yet, so I didn't push it, or actually I was wrong, and it was about something else, but by then, they were able to express the emotion or thoughts they had about these pictures - what felt true to them. So it was at least useful in a way.
And sure it could be that one doesn't want to face something yet but I think it's also often true that the information given doesn't match enough what's up for the person, is completely unconnected, or it touches on it too tangentially. Or it actually has something relevant to do with it but it's just by way of an association. Or the person hasn't yet processed enough info for themselves in their own preferred way of processing first to really see the thing/issue even if the suggestion matches the actual issue. But yeah when it's got a relevant (and recognizable, i.e. processed enough, or able to face it) association it can be helpful.
Myst finds everything really interesting. She's really fucking smart.
However, @Myst and I are what I call Private Semi-Duals (as opposed to the Public Semi-Duality of LIE-EII). She and I share half the dual functions of our actual respective Duals. For example,
LIE...ESI...LSI...EIE...LIE
Te....Fi.....Ti......Fe....Te.....4D
Ni....Se.....Se....Ni.....Ni.....3D
Se...Ni......Ni.....Se....Se....2D
Fi....Te.....Fe.....Ti.....Fi......1D
With respect to Ni and Se, she and I have the same relationship to each other that we have to our own duals. In my experience, it it is very hard to actually explain how some particular function works to a dual, at least to the point where they can do it themselves. It is much, much easier to simply hang out with them and demonstrate it.
I've had two LSI GF's, and in both cases, they were very wary of the future, while I can provide a reasonably well-assured future. Similarly, they exert Se force in the environment, which I find to be incredibly sexy and can't do at all myself.
I've been dating ESI's more recently, and they behave almost exactly the same way as LSI's with respect to those two functions.
I was talking to an ESI last week who was complaining to me that one of her customers wanted to change an appointment date that had been set for months! (My Goodness!) She couldn't easily see that this might be advantageous because it allows her to do other things that she needed to do in that time frame until I pointed it out. She interpreted her extreme discomfort with the change as an Se attempt by her customer to control the work relationship. I said, No, maybe the guy had a simple schedule change, she wasn't hurt by it, it made her look accommodating and gave her some spare time to do other things.
It is far easier to just demonstrate dual functions than to explain them. More comfortable, too.
That's what I call cool Ne demonstrative lol
Shoot me down if I'm wrong: I'm not completely sold of 4Dat this point. While it has ability to learn and pick thing as it goes but does it have ability to go forward with great leaps?
Like having time on your fingertips. [I'm still hanging on result/process thing that can make business type's creative look more complementing than the same.]
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
Hey I got a question for you, what difference would you have compared to Adam's statement: "I, myself, see things in the real world, but they seem to have a fogginess about them, as if they were overlaid with multiple possible futures. The things themselves still seem to predominate, but their potentialities are right there."Shoot me down if I'm wrong: I'm not completely sold of 4D
Like having time on your fingertips. [I'm still hanging on result/process thing that can make business type's creative look more complementing than the same.]
?
*shoots you down*Shoot me down if I'm wrong: I'm not completely sold of 4D
Like having time on your fingertips. [I'm still hanging on result/process thing that can make business type's creative look more complementing than the same.]
You're using Ne language which is foreign to how Ni works. Ni is more like careful contemplation which can result in some kind of epiphany. (Epiphanies can probably go for either form of intuition but "leaping" is more exclusive to Ne.)
@Myst, it's not exactly that objects seem foggy to me. I have a hard time explaining this. I can see them clearly, but their concrete objectiveness takes a back seat to their potentials. I may see an object in the environment, like a book, for example, but it could be a book here, or there, or some other place, and it would still primarily be a book that I'm going to use to design a MWIR objective lens. In other words, I don't remember things or places, I just remember potential uses for things.
The world is a swirling tornado of objects, and you can reach in any time to pull out the things you need to do something. But then you release them and they float away, to be found later if needed.
This sounds weird, even to me. It's not the thing, it's the use of the thing. So the thing becomes of lesser importance than the use to which it can be put.
I think Ni is like Ne in that one can leap (skip) to a conclusion. For example I can model how a person might act in future (Ni with Fe, I suppose) or how a social scenario might evolve, and what those connect to in the past, or how they extend from a pattern in the past. It’s done in my head and it isn’t logical, but it’s not like contemplation just imo because that implies something discursive or smooth or ... something.*shoots you down*
You're using Ne language which is foreign to how Ni works. Ni is more like careful contemplation which can result in some kind of epiphany. (Epiphanies can probably go for either form of intuition but "leaping" is more exclusive to Ne.)
LSI: “I still can’t figure out Pinterest.”
Me: “It’s just, like, idea boards.”
LSI: “I don’t have ideas.”
You're right, Ni isn't always contemplation, that was overly dismissive on my part. And yeah, it can suddenly apprehend things, for example "finally seeing things for what they truly are" which can inspire urgency in action (Se). It might be less plodding / logical when paired with Fe.I think Ni is like Ne in that one can leap (skip) to a conclusion. For example I can model how a person might act in future (Ni with Fe, I suppose) or how a social scenario might evolve, and what those connect to in the past, or how they extend from a pattern in the past. It’s done in my head and it isn’t logical, but it’s not like contemplation just imo because that implies something discursive or smooth or ... something.
Ne is more like mental jumping or rushing to discover/uncover the implications of a promising "something" - it's more active.
It's difficult for me to distinguish how they work internally at the highest levels without communicating them externally too...maybe they actually work together or merge into one at that point.
I think framing it in terms of conclusions is overly rational, what Ne does is not so much jump to conclusions as perceive a picture that entails a broad array of information, but focuses on the borders. So extroverted functions in general concern themselves with threshold distinctions, with the internals being outlined but not really perceived in full detail. in this way they can cover a lot of ground by generating a picture, articulating some threshold case, then getting feedback that may lead to another picture, likewise outlined, and the internals are being "skipped" over, like taking big steps at a time, as long as the outlines are reliable (in this sense you just want to perceive people's meaning, not necessarily go into the meaning of their meaning, which is more Ni). Ni has this sense of internal coherence that tries to deepen itself by proceeding inward, i.e.: instead of moving large distances by proceeding on the basis of outlines its more about strengthening the bonds that are structuring the single image. this image grows super dense and detailed, but unlike Ne its not a wide constellation of ideas with lots of empty space, like an idea cloud, but more like a singular tunnel you descend into or ascend. In this sense if you wrapped that cloud into a tube and traveled down into it you would have a sense of Ni. there would be more hyper connectivity and it would be dense, less can "escape" from it, but it would also take up less surface area. it would also have a hard time picturing things that aren't connected, whereas Ne can more easily throw up a new branch. with Ni something has to go out and meet it or it can get befuddled, radically new ways of looking at things meet resistance. like if something is outside the tube it cant just extend an arm, at least not easily
Last edited by Bertrand; 08-01-2018 at 08:07 PM.
Yeah you’re right, it’s hard to totally separate them, but I think for me the distinction rests on the “promising ‘something’” part, as you call it. There you’re pinpointing the object potentiation, which isn’t really the Ni way. (Ni-wise I’m more about the “cloud around the something” and “the unpromising pattern,” personally.) The rest is more ambiguous as Ni also jumps, ime, but among patterns and in and out of the numinous or whatever ya wanna call that.
Last edited by golden; 08-02-2018 at 01:09 AM.
LSI: “I still can’t figure out Pinterest.”
Me: “It’s just, like, idea boards.”
LSI: “I don’t have ideas.”
What you describe as Ni is Ni HA with Ne PoLR.
(It's a very nice description otherwise.)
Well I’m glad someone has a response to that because I had no idea what Bertrand was talking about. (And I do read his posts now and I usually understand what he’s saying.)
The distinctions people are offering itt between Ni and Ne overall aren’t hitting home for me.
Last edited by golden; 08-12-2018 at 09:38 PM.
LSI: “I still can’t figure out Pinterest.”
Me: “It’s just, like, idea boards.”
LSI: “I don’t have ideas.”
Lol it's pretty much how my Ni/Ne works too so it was easy for me to follow
And it's in line with how Ni HA is described with Ne PoLR in the theory.
yeah there's a lot of factors, some being whether intuition is base or creative and whether its introverted or extroverted.. there are different possible relationships they have to one another. base extinguishes ignoring, but creative/demonstrative have a more synergetic relationship. the phenomenology thus varies depending on type, so any one description of intuition at work is never going to cover all the possible permutations, unless you use extremely vague terms like "perception by the unconscious." my aim was to give a normative description that covered the basic general features. i have a feeling especially for N doms there could be some very weird phenomenology at work. as always it would be interesting to get more people to describe their first person experience. i actually have a non stop internal monologue running in my head, at least when I'm alone. I can shut it off to listen to other people (which I find really enjoyable) or take in sensory experience, but when i'm by myself its like having a running conversation with myself is the default mode. i think it has to do with how the hemispheres communicate
Last edited by Bertrand; 08-13-2018 at 12:46 AM.
I don't usually have the internal monologue, I think it would actually be really draining for me to do that default mode network crap for too long... the opposite to it is the task positive network - yes this is for attention to tasks - and I do tend to be task oriented instead.
that's funny when I read the first sentence it was like describing looking around until realizing you have something you'd rather be doing, which sounds like a sudden realization like "hey I'm bored" and then going to do that something. whereas many people will linger in that state for a long time. I think boredom is honestly a consequence of arranging ones life wherein one is trapped, so boredom becomes not so much doing monotonous things but feeling like one is prevented from doing what one really wants. but one can set things up to where monotonous stuff is a step along the way to something someone really wants, so it doesn't have that feeling of protracted boringness, since theres some kind of point to it. I think that's the wisdom in what a lot of people who seemingly lead boring lives but don't feel it that way, i.e.: the boringness is little more than a projection, because the person within the activity has a reason for doing it. boredom in other words is a feeling of lack of empowerment, but if every time you realize you're bored and you go and do something you'd rather be doing it sets up a relationship to life wherein you never end up trapped, you always feel empowered. I think people don't realize what a pit they've sort of slid into not taking this approach to life and the consequence is a ton of wasted time felt as boredom. I guess what im trying to say is boredom is a symptom of leading a disempowered approach to one's own life. I mean sometimes you're waiting in a ridiculous line, like when I was in the army when you first join you spend literally like 2 days waiting in lines at the beginning and that was boring, but it was intentionally meant as a form of hazing, but imagine everyone feeling like life has thrust that dynamic on them at every turn, its because they're acting like they don't have a choice, but everyone has a choice they just don't want to risk making one and would rather be bored. but some people choose not to be bored before it comes to that, so even mundane activities have a purpose and aren't like a long series of never ending punishments
Yeah even if you might need to take time to find the purpose/meaning, you can do that, you are in control of that in this sense. Idk why some people would see it as a risk making a choice about this?
there's no guarantee if you take the time to seek out purpose/meaning you're going to find it, so it entails risk. in fact what it really entails is a leap of faith.. and there's plenty of talk these days to the effect that radical faith is essentially evil, and socially irresponsible, so its not surprising people not wanting to be bad reject taking that risk and then offload responsibility to the environment to entertain them, i.e.: make up for the boredom that resulted as a consequence of them agreeing to "be good." its a kind of contract people make with the environment. i won't believe in anything if you keep me distracted and well fed. and in this way we all stay safe and don't do anything too crazy. this is considered rational
I think it's the resistance to the nothingness that creates the boredom. I mean, if the situation you are in is very limited and the options for activities restricted and you are dreaming of all the things you cannot do because say you lost your leg or your partner or (for me) have a baby, and there is no external stimulation and you are stuck in the mundane, once you stop looking outwards in longing and be there, the mundane becomes extraordinary in itself and also the groundingness of the boredom and repetition is in fact fertilizer to the unconscious and the imagination because you are sensing in the present your brain is safer to explore and come back over and over, because you are burdened by physical work, and you start to have more and more insight and perception that you would not have encountered if your life was more stimulating. So now whenever I am in that trapped state I see it's purpose and try (not always succeeding) to go with it. There are always choices, and more choices arise instantaneously and awareness of options you never would have imagined.
I imagine this is what life is for most people over the world who need to be working in some way when they are not eating or sleeping, they can still have a rich inner life
Edit: and also I think boredom is a kind of judgement of the external environment based on what you believe the impact is on your identity, ie this is making me a boring person. But when you stop to realise that it is only a distorted personal judgement and that who you tell yourself you are is by no means who you are and mostly distracts from you actually making choices to do, be, think, then you step into a more vulnerable space because you are not protecting your sense of identity any more you are being and everything impacts you strongly and life is more vivid and not at all boring, although maybe more painful but to quote Kafka:
You can hold yourself back from the sufferings of the world, that is something you are free to do and it accords with your nature, but perhaps this very holding back is the one suffering you could avoid.
I mean, boredom reveals the inescapability of your own death and demands the death of certain kinds of identification in order to accept it.
Last edited by Guillaine; 08-13-2018 at 12:26 PM.
I see little timelines of people's lives I imagine (and these scenarios in my head have that fogginess), how something will turn out if we leave it this way, but it's not so strong as I would always know where someone will end up with (the world has some chaos in it, random happenings etc.), but I have my fears, most of the time, and see where something can end up in a bad way. I have friends that for example deal with things, and I know if they won't fix this or this and that, it will have this and this consequence. Also, this is the most useful, when I have to make decisions fast, and I'm able to run down one sentence or one action in my head for a whole chain of things that would happen after, and can stop myself in a second, if I don't want the scenario to end up there. I also have a general idea about where everyone I know will end up, but I think it's not really punctual, just what my unconscious puts together from half informations, and my impressions, so I don't necessarily listen to it on its own. There are cases though, when I see someone's attributes, and in my head, there is already a full picture of "why I should talk/not talk/be with/etc." with this person, and feel I get a whole picture of them, what they will do in A B and C scenarios, etc.
Don't know if this helped.
This is similar to what I have in debates, I think. Sometimes I just feel the logical incoherence, and I have to make the conscious decision then to analyze it fruther. I also know that third mode. I think we are talking about the same processes here.
I understand what you mean by the dream interpretation, and I agree with how it can be a miss sometimes.
I think there are different levels to me in dreams too. There are the ones, that seem to have a symbolism, but it's not clear to me, so I have to think about it more. There are ones, that has the symbolism that seems obvious, so it's easy to understand the meaning behind it (I also got many emotions coming up from these dreams, so they guide me too). The third and favourite version is when I see something that my subconscious knows already is in progress, but I don't, and one day when it happens, I realize I knew about it all along.
For example, I had a dream with people clothed in white and black, under a bridge. Someone was talking to me about the black clothed people - how they are going towards their instincts, and act like barbarians. I saw them killing each other, taking each other's belongings, everyone for himself. They ate each other, and they were going in the shadows. I looked down, and saw I was dressed in black. But I stayed silent, and didn't do anything, I was just a wanderer, seeing what is it like to live in the shadows. Then I looked behind my back, and saw people in white. There was a friend of mine, clothed in white, and she was looking towards the darkness I was standing in. As I was standing there, I wasn't worried - I knew I won't be here for all eternity, I'm just a wanderer, but I knew that moment, she will never wear black clothes, and never come here to explore.
And then, IRL at a climax of arguments, I realized how my friend will deny something that's a part of her, and all of us, and how I will be alone in here, without her, because she won't ever want to come here, or listen to these kind of things. And the full picture was born. I understood that dream before, and agreed, but it seems like things are stuck halfway in my subconscious sometimes, even when I "kind of understand what's going on".
This reminds me of mindfulness in treating OCD thoughts or painful feelings in affective disorders. Or what someone told me about women giving birth and taking pain as waves - if you resist pain, or if you try to bargain and explain your thoughts compulsively (OCD), it will become worse, instead of travelling on the waves, and being mindful. I know people who used this philosophy with OCD, and it helped them a lot. I haven't tried it though, and don't know much about mindfulness, so I lack knowledge in this area.
Last edited by 0i0; 08-13-2018 at 01:53 PM.
yes I think there's a lot to the idea that if you refuse to engage because you think engagement will bring suffering, and you do this wholesale rather than judiciously, your reward is suffering of a different kind--boredom. in this way its an indication of lack of meaning in one's life, because one has never committed to anything to begin with. I don't think a commitment has to be arbitrary either, like one needn't just pick from an array of options. I think if one tunes into the self it provides direction and meaning, people are just quick to deny their own right to have a say in the picking, because society is so quick to judge everything, so one feels obligated to tune out ones own feelings and sense of meaning as a concession to the extroverted standpoint. if for no other reason most "productivity" stems from such a concession, in other words resources flow from aligning oneself with society's values, so the man who trusts in his own meaning is often considered little more than a poor fool. so if you accept this and simply avoid pain and try to get by with just enough, but never commit to a positive meaning, you're bound to be decently well taken care of but totally bored, because you neither want to compete with society on its own terms and enter the rat race full bore, because of the high degree of suffering and sacrifice of self that entails, but neither do you allow yourself to trust your own instincts, and so sort of hover in a state of meaninglessness strung out between the two. its that untenable position of knowing society is wrong, but having no confidence in oneself either
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote