ILIs/INTps and being ambitious

[FarDraft]

Yes, my coworker has a strong 3 fix. I actually do this all the time: What they are good at, however, is making non-linear connections between what they have seen somewhere and how it can be useful in the problem they're solving now. I thought they were provided by my Ne, maybe it is related to both Ne and Ni. How do you differentiate associative thinking from associative memory? (I used google I am just curious about your differentiation) Do you find it easier to differentiate your Ni from your Ne than differentiating your Ti from your Te?


this post claims that Ni corresponds to linear process intuition and Ne corresponds to nonlinear: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...stems-Thinking

I think this article gives a good definition for Ne, you can check if you are interested: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...p/395-Ne-Blobs

I should mention that many of my thoughts have been influenced by Gulenko's work, at least now. You can watch this conversation between Gulenko and Ben Vaserlan for more information. https://youtu.be/9ttGcX59jLc In this conversation, they make the note of differentiating between static and dynamic behaviour. Whereas the LII is static, meaning that they remember things at a particular moment in time, perhaps in more clarity, the ILI remembers many things at different times, leading to an associative memory.

I would generally agree with the link you provided in that Ne is inter-system and Ni is intra-system. Connecting different systems together is what holographic-panoramic cognition does best, but it's not what I'm saying. This leads straight into the difference between associative memory and thinking. Basically, the difference is that associative memory is subjective and associative thinking is objective. If Einstein hadn't connected electromagnetism and relativity, realizing that the speed of light is constant, then someone else would have since there's only one correct theory of the universe. Granted, Einstein is thought to have been an ENTp, which is not holographic-panoramic but an Ne user nonetheless. However, an associative memory need not connect different systems together in an objective manner but rather what worked in a particular moment in time and how that situation relates to the present one. It sees patterns in one's own experience of the systems rather than patterns between the systems themselves, leading to a highly subjective quality to it. In this sense, we can say that Ni users are "in the system".

I can give you an example. I recently took an exam in proof based linear algebra. One of the problems on it looked very similar to a problem I had seen before on a problem set. Thus, I tried using a method that worked for that problem, and it worked. After completing the exam, I was talking to other people on how it was similar to a problem set problem, yet no one understood what I was talking about. That's because I had conceived of a subjective pattern based on what had worked in my past experience rather than an objective one. Contrast this with another student who is an ENTp, I believe. In class, he frequently connects a piece of knowledge that we just learned to another piece of knowledge that we had not learned (if X is true, then doesn't that mean that Y should be true? When X and Y are of completely different domains). This is not a subjective connection based on what works but rather an objective connection based on what is logically consistent. Had he not seen this, then someone else inevitably would have since there is only one possible connection between the two domains in this circumstance.

The overall consequence of this is that Ni users are frequently misunderstood since the connections they make are very personal whereas Ne users are frequently considered out of touch with reality since the connections they make are very abstract. The difference is, however, that Ne connections are verifiable by logic whereas Ni connections are (often) not - they are only verifiable by empirical means since the connection is not an objective fact but rather one that just works.

I hope this makes my thoughts clearer.

EDIT: My understanding of the IEs has changed since this time. I don't believe Ne makes connections anymore. I still think that the guy in my class is an ILE, but the connections I was noticing were Ti connections, not Ne connections. The connections are still objective since logic is objective (of course, assuming everything that's necessary) and Ti is an external (explicit) IE. Ni is internal (implicit) and so the connections are not so objective yet may still be true.