Beta quadra Ni?

[tcaudilllg]

What is it to you?

[tcaudilllg]

It must be alignment.

[strrrng]

alignment makes some sense, as beta is double abstract fields. I tend to disregard the 'external' boundaries of anything I'm thinking about, and look for the processes that relate it to other things, because ultimately it's the same design in different forms.

meaning, purpose, blah blah... no. beta is -Ni/+Ne, and since the former is valued, the attitude of "removing past mistakes," "gradual caution," etc. has more to do with filtering things to make sure the larger progression is... aligned. +Ne being expansive is just a counterpoint to this.

[Krig the Viking]

Ni is internal dynamics of fields, a.k.a. implicit dynamics of relations. It's all the implicit, non-obvious, indirect, long-range, or abstract ways in which one object affects another.

Time is the most obvious example of this: how Object A affects Object B over a long period of time is not immediately apparent, and can only be inferred or deduced by an observer. Ni infers these effects intuitively. Types with strong Ni are good at understanding the flow of events over time, understanding how the flow of events in the past is likely to affect the flow of events in the future, etc. They are good at extrapolating from what went on in the past to what's going on now, to what will happen in the future.

Distance is another example: how Object A affects Object B over a long distance is also not directly observable. Ni types are good at intuitively understanding how events separated by long distances can affect one another, or how both can affect or be affected by other things. The economist who keeps track of steel prices in Hong Kong, movie ticket prices in America, and interest rates in Switzerland, knows how they are related and how they affect one another, despite being separated by distance.

Another example is poetry, metaphor, and meaning. While Ne deals with the static aspects of meaning (Symbol A could mean Definition B or Definition C), Ni deals with the dynamic aspects of meaning: how intangible things like poetry and art and metaphor affect people, how meaning is created by the act of combining symbols and metaphors, etc. Beta NFs, with Ni linked to Fe, have a strong understanding of how intangible effects affect people's internal emotional dynamics. They intuitively understand how the flow of words and meaning affect people's emotions, how emotions change over long periods of time, how emotional influence is spread over long distances (such as in a crowd).

Essentially, Ni intuitively understands how things affect one another in the Big Picture. It understands how the Big Picture changes, how effects spread from one object to another through the Big Picture's network of connections. This is true whether the Big Picture is large-scale economics, politics, poetic meaning, public opinion, or whatever. Beta Ni focuses on how this affects Emotion and Mood, while Gamma Ni focuses on how this affects Practical Effectiveness and Productivity.

[strrrng]

time is seen as objective, so there's a key difference between causal predictions and fluid impressions. the lack of a fixed structure in takes time out of its normal context and makes it a vague placeholder for perceptual continuity (because -valuers like augusta are using to pin it down). but time is irrelevant to an -ego pov, because the rhythm is internal and defined by 'random' associations. so it's not just inferences about x leading to y; it's the fact that x and y have their own dynamic that's integrated among a multitude of others. distance = non-locality, and this ties into the random associations; event x doesn't have a 'distant' effect on event y, they belong to the same strand of perception. hence Jung talking about types extracting images from their impressions; it's an inverted form of objectivity. I find myself noticing something unsurprising more often than predicting it, if that makes sense.

[FDG]

Distance is another example: how Object A affects Object B over a long distance is also not directly observable. Ni types are good at intuitively understanding how events separated by long distances can affect one another, or how both can affect or be affected by other things. The economist who keeps track of steel prices in Hong Kong, movie ticket prices in America, and interest rates in Switzerland, knows how they are related and how they affect one another, despite being separated by distance.

Ew no, that is Te, those relationships are definitely observable - there is a clear chain of causation.

[Krig the Viking]

Distance is another example: how Object A affects Object B over a long distance is also not directly observable. Ni types are good at intuitively understanding how events separated by long distances can affect one another, or how both can affect or be affected by other things. The economist who keeps track of steel prices in Hong Kong, movie ticket prices in America, and interest rates in Switzerland, knows how they are related and how they affect one another, despite being separated by distance.

Ew no, that is Te, those relationships are definitely observable - there is a clear chain of causation.

Actually, it's Ni+Te. Delta STs have strong Te, but aren't typically interested in or skilled at following the subtleties of global finance, which is a primarily Gamma NT field. The numbers themselves may be directly observable Te phenomenon, but how the one influences the other over time and distance is still the province of Ni.

[rat1]

time is seen as objective, so there's a key difference between causal predictions and fluid impressions. the lack of a fixed structure in takes time out of its normal context and makes it a vague placeholder for perceptual continuity (because -valuers like augusta are using to pin it down). but time is irrelevant to an -ego pov, because the rhythm is internal and defined by 'random' associations. so it's not just inferences about x leading to y; it's the fact that x and y have their own dynamic that's integrated among a multitude of others. distance = non-locality, and this ties into the random associations; event x doesn't have a 'distant' effect on event y, they belong to the same strand of perception. hence Jung talking about types extracting images from their impressions; it's an inverted form of objectivity. I find myself noticing something unsurprising more often than predicting it, if that makes sense.

^
My thinking is impulses triggered by whatever enters my mind. The impulses are freely associated and I follow them along their course. With Ti.. the paths form into constructs. I think Beta Ni is uninhibited and free roaming where Gamma Ni is exploratory but within defined boundaries. It's more attached to reality. Ni without boundaries is good for modeling human behavior over time, since it's only calibrated by experience. Beta Ni is also interested in all the possible branches of a system. Beta Ni types will ask alot of seemingly irrelevant questions, they're just normalizing their Ni which can go in any direction. That's the basic assumption of Beta Ni, that anything is possible.. which is why it's such a subjective function.

[FDG]

Ew no, that is Te, those relationships are definitely observable - there is a clear chain of causation.

Actually, it's Ni+Te. Delta STs have strong Te, but aren't typically interested in or skilled at following the subtleties of global finance, which is a primarily Gamma NT field. The numbers themselves may be directly observable Te phenomenon, but how the one influences the other over time and distance is still the province of Ni.

I'm pretty sure a delta ST could easily produce an analysis like the one you wrote, it's extremely simplicistic, even if it might appear complex to someone that isn't very familiar with the subject. You left out what could really be a tinge of , namely the ability to understand the exact MOMENT something will happen.

[silverchris9]

time is seen as objective, so there's a key difference between causal predictions and fluid impressions. the lack of a fixed structure in takes time out of its normal context and makes it a vague placeholder for perceptual continuity (because -valuers like augusta are using to pin it down). but time is irrelevant to an -ego pov, because the rhythm is internal and defined by 'random' associations. so it's not just inferences about x leading to y; it's the fact that x and y have their own dynamic that's integrated among a multitude of others. distance = non-locality, and this ties into the random associations; event x doesn't have a 'distant' effect on event y, they belong to the same strand of perception. hence Jung talking about types extracting images from their impressions; it's an inverted form of objectivity. I find myself noticing something unsurprising more often than predicting it, if that makes sense.

It's about the relatedness of everything. "All truths wait in all things." Also the demonstrative (i.e., included) Fi dimension of NiFe is precisely in that awareness of the inherent interconnectedness of all things. In fact, that focus may be a way to help distinguish NiFe proclamations of ethical responsibility (a la Michael Jackson: "Heal the world/make it a better place/for you and for me and the entire human race...") and FiNe... um... ethical whateverness.

Beta Ni is... it's all in Song of Myself. "Houses and rooms are full of perfumes"---The presence of one set of implicit values/relationships, "experienced" by the Beta NF as the "atmosphere" or "vibe" of a place, has a HUGE effect on how we perceive everything else in that space.

It's sifting through associations for common patterns, frequently including the capacity to label the patterns themselves as phenomena in their own right, as in "Apart from the pulling and hauling stands what I am." The "Me Myself" or the "Real Me" is actually a pattern of associations given its own name, its own life, as an individual, "emergent" phenomenon.

It's also vision as in "my speech is the twin of my vision; it is unequal to measure itself."

And back to what Nick said, it's true: you experience beta Ni as discovering something obvious, which appears to Ni-seeking types as like miraculous insight, and to Ni-non-valuing types as unfounded (untrue) assumption. But to you it's just like, "I see what's happening here."

I have real trouble boiling down Beta Ni to some sort of essence. To me, it's just reading, but then to someone else it's something else, and to someone else, reading describes what they do which is not Beta Ni. So I dunno. It's really hard to boil down to one essence. It is fundamentally perceptual though. It's just a connection you see, not something that you puzzle out, really. The puzzling out is almost always just taking some stuff and throwing it up there, and juggling it around until it fits together, and then you "see" the finished picture, rather than being able to explain step-by-step how the piece fit together, because you didn't put it together step-by-step, it put itself together, like random invisible atoms colliding and combining into visible molecules or something.

I'm pretty sure a delta ST could easily produce an analysis like the one you wrote, it's extremely simplicistic, even if it might appear complex to someone that isn't very familiar with the subject. You left out what could really be a tinge of , namely the ability to understand the exact MOMENT something will happen.

Well, obviously, once something has been pioneered by the people who really understand it, it's always codified into rules and forms that people of all types can follow. So it would be most accurate to say that Gamma Ni is (archetypally) the function that would pioneer something like global finance, although any type could subsequently pick up on the rules or figure out how the Gamma NT "got there." But it's highly unlikely that a Delta ST could "get there" own his or her own.

As a parallel, it's quite unlikely that a Beta NF could discover something like special relativity, but they are highly capable of comprehending the principles once they've been discovered, and even expounding on them (in fact, non-pioneer types may be the best to expound upon a theory, because they see it from a slightly different angle).

[strrrng]

^
My thinking is impulses triggered by whatever enters my mind. The impulses are freely associated and I follow them along their course. With Ti.. the paths form into constructs. I think Beta Ni is uninhibited and free roaming where Gamma Ni is exploratory but within defined boundaries. It's more attached to reality. Ni without boundaries is good for modeling human behavior over time, since it's only calibrated by experience. Beta Ni is also interested in all the possible branches of a system. Beta Ni types will ask alot of seemingly irrelevant questions, they're just normalizing their Ni which can go in any direction. That's the basic assumption of Beta Ni, that anything is possible.. which is why it's such a subjective function.

yeah, double abstract dynamics make the template and process one for gamma Ni, whereas beta's abstract fields separate them.

It's sifting through associations for common patterns, frequently including the capacity to label the patterns themselves as phenomena in their own right, as in "Apart from the pulling and hauling stands what I am." The "Me Myself" or the "Real Me" is actually a pattern of associations given its own name, its own life, as an individual, "emergent" phenomenon.

yeah, that's always the fallback, that I'm just suspended in flux, and none of the patterns would have any import otherwise; but that becomes their very proof -- that a social nuance can spark memories of several other situations and turn subjectivity into something relatable.

It's also vision as in "my speech is the twin of my vision; it is unequal to measure itself."

indeed. the measurement is defined by the rhythm, so if you didn't catch it to begin with, there's no point in sterilizing things with a reduction (Dead Poets Society ftw).

[tcaudilllg]

Ni has been described as "water" or a "river". If I am being carried down a river, would beta Ni be speculating as to what the possibilities are for me to be taken down one fork or another, and especially, how these would affect my chances to escape from the flow, or survive the trip?

The problem with any definition of beta Ni is this: any change in Fe must produce a change in it.

[Sumer1an]

time is seen as objective, so there's a key difference between causal predictions and fluid impressions. the lack of a fixed structure in takes time out of its normal context and makes it a vague placeholder for perceptual continuity (because -valuers like augusta are using to pin it down). but time is irrelevant to an -ego pov, because the rhythm is internal and defined by 'random' associations. so it's not just inferences about x leading to y; it's the fact that x and y have their own dynamic that's integrated among a multitude of others. distance = non-locality, and this ties into the random associations; event x doesn't have a 'distant' effect on event y, they belong to the same strand of perception. hence Jung talking about types extracting images from their impressions; it's an inverted form of objectivity. I find myself noticing something unsurprising more often than predicting it, if that makes sense.

^
My thinking is impulses triggered by whatever enters my mind. The impulses are freely associated and I follow them along their course. With Ti.. the paths form into constructs. I think Beta Ni is uninhibited and free roaming where Gamma Ni is exploratory but within defined boundaries. It's more attached to reality. Ni without boundaries is good for modeling human behavior over time, since it's only calibrated by experience. Beta Ni is also interested in all the possible branches of a system. Beta Ni types will ask alot of seemingly irrelevant questions, they're just normalizing their Ni which can go in any direction. That's the basic assumption of Beta Ni, that anything is possible.. which is why it's such a subjective function.

The bolded applies to me. My thinking is generally pretty impulsive. For example someone may say something to me that gets me thinking about a general behavior of humans and then I begin to synthesize out of that. I think that modeling human behavior, going through the branches in a system, and asking irrelevant questions to piece together things is really just an Ni dom thing in general. I share those similarities with my IEI friend (I dont know any ILIs well enough to say I share those similarities with them though Im sure I do.) I can even model human emotions well but I am particularly bad at knowing how I come across, manipulating emotions, and saying things that aren't offensive and that is where me and my IEI friend differ. I would would agree with you in that gamma Ni is more exploratory. I generally have a set objective and most of my wanderings are fixed toward that goal, where I feel that IEIs are not really like that.

[rat1]

Yeah, I'm just floating around. I look like I'm lost in a forest the majority of the time. I spill liquids on myself all the time and I drive like shit. I also am a terrible worker cuz I flounder my time spacing out and thinking about something or just not caring enough to pay attention.

[strrrng]

Ni has been described as "water" or a "river". If I am being carried down a river, would beta Ni be speculating as to what the possibilities are for me to be taken down one fork or another, and especially, how these would affect my chances to escape from the flow, or survive the trip?

The problem with any definition of beta Ni is this: any change in Fe must produce a change in it.

really, air is a better analogy for intuitive functions; water is logical functions.

beta Ni would be more concerned with what the given 'current' means within the river's broader movement. but the analogy reminds me of expat's boat story, which ruins it lol.

I generally have a set objective and most of my wanderings are fixed toward that goal, where I feel that IEIs are not really like that.

process/result explains it. I never have specific objectives, just feelings about the overriding direction of things that naturally solidify.

Yeah, I'm just floating around. I look like I'm lost in a forest the majority of the time. I spill liquids on myself all the time and I drive like shit. I also am a terrible worker cuz I flounder my time spacing out and thinking about something or just not caring enough to pay attention.

I can seem absent and aimless (mostly when high), but also very composed and aware. it probably has more to do with our e-types.

[717495]

Ew no, that is Te, those relationships are definitely observable - there is a clear chain of causation.

Actually, it's Ni+Te. Delta STs have strong Te, but aren't typically interested in or skilled at following the subtleties of global finance, which is a primarily Gamma NT field. The numbers themselves may be directly observable Te phenomenon, but how the one influences the other over time and distance is still the province of Ni.

No FDG is right, imo. It's all Te. Just as well, any type can make 'predictions.' I think Ni being tied to Se stimuli will often make little predictions all the time due to its unapparent nature, as a subjectively-based intuition that is able to be expressed encouragingly through Se cues.

FWIW I don't think the functions work that well when trying to analyze them in quadra differences, unless you're accounting for whole processes between the functions rather than by themselves.

[tcaudilllg]

Actually, it's Ni+Te. Delta STs have strong Te, but aren't typically interested in or skilled at following the subtleties of global finance, which is a primarily Gamma NT field. The numbers themselves may be directly observable Te phenomenon, but how the one influences the other over time and distance is still the province of Ni.

No FDG is right, imo. It's all Te. Just as well, any type can make 'predictions.' I think Ni being tied to Se stimuli will often make little predictions all the time due to its unapparent nature, as a subjectively-based intuition that is able to be expressed encouragingly through Se cues.

FWIW I don't think the functions work that well when trying to analyze them in quadra differences, unless you're accounting for whole processes between the functions rather than by themselves.

Yeah I think someone needs to stop questioning dimensionality.