How Delta's version of Ne is demonstrated

[anndelise]

TLDR summary is near the bottom.

I've been thinking about this the past couple of days. When typing a person, some people claim to see Delta Ne in the person's writings, others claim there's not enough Delta Ne demonstrated to draw the conclusion of Delta Ne ego. Which brings the question of "What demonstrates Delta's version of Ne?"

Ne is often described as intuition of possibiities. Ne ego types are said to recognize possibilities, create new opportunities, new beginnings, reconcile different perspectives and povs, rapidly generate ideas, etc.

I'm going to focus specifically on Delta's version of Ne...this is the idea of diverging possibilities, of alternate possibles. (Delta's Ne is negativistic/divergent with Fi//Te as the converging factors. Alpha's Ne is positivistic/convergent with Ti/Fe as the diverging factors.)

A helpful metaphor is to see Delta Ne as aware of, and consideration of, "other worlds", "alternate universes". The idea that given a circumstance, there are multiple possible meanings for it, multiple possible developments of it, and/or multiple possible influences on it. Always in the back of the Delta Ne ego's mind is 'possible alternatives'.

This awareness of possible alternatives makes it difficult for Delta Ne to feel complete certainty, to see things in pure back and white, this way or that way with no shades of gray. One way of noticing this is that they seem to hedge their statements with words like could, may, might, usually, often, sometimes, some, seem to, etc. This acknowledges that there are times when what they are saying might not apply.

Delta Ne ego types also often switch between alternate perspectives, alternative points of views. On the one hand, but on the other. This is often seen when they take into consideration the reader's pov, or the opposing side's pov, or other ways of looking at what they are saying. They instinctively know that what they are saying could be read/interpreted in different ways, and so will try to redirect some of those differing interpretations towards what they intended.

Another way that it is seen is when they analyze a situation/person/idea/etc by looking at it from differing perspectives. It's by seeing from these alternative perspectives that Delta Ne ego types are able to start narrowing down the essence of who/what is being studied/analyzed. But still, even as Delta Ne ego narrows down to the essence, there's still the underlying idea that there might be cases in which an alternative is true.

Admittedly EII won't be as extensive in it as IEE's 4D base Ne. But it'll still be there, underlying their thoughts and writings. And when it is not there, it can rub wrong a Delta NF.

TLDR In summary:
So, how to tell if someone is possibly demonstrating Delta Ne?

Do their conceptualizations include differing points of view on the topic?
Do they approach the topic in differing ways?
Do they demonstrate awareness and allowance of alternative interpretations/explainations/values?
Do they allow for cases in which what they are saying may not be true?
Do they fairly regularly use 'hedging' words? (may be, might, could be, usually, often, sometimes, some, seems to, etc)

 

For each belief/idea/interpretation of yours on a topic, ask yourself what some of the alternatives beliefs/ideas are on the same topic.

For each alternative you come up with, try to find the ways in which that belief/idea could be a valid one. How else could it be valid?

Under what circumstances might your belief/idea/interpretation be false?

 

I think classical modal logic fits well with the concept of Delta Ne thinking. Modal logic describes things in terms of possibility and necessity, and explores how they intertwine.

* x is possible if x might be True (or might be False); x is not necessarily False
* x is necessary if x must be True (and cannot possibly be False); x is not possibly False
* x is contingent if x is not necessarily True (x might be True in a given case but might not be True in another case); x is not necessarily False and not necessarily True

rephrased in terms of alternate worlds:
* something is "possible" if it is True in at least one possible world.
* something is "necessary" if it is True in all possible worlds.

common modal words include:

usually, unusual
possibility, possibly, may, might, may be, could be, can
necessity, necessarily, not necessarily, must be, have to
impossibility, not possible, can't, couldn't

[Sol]

There is Ne. There is no special delta Ne.

[uncivilized]

This awareness of possible alternatives makes it difficult for Delta Ne to feel complete certainty, to see things in pure back and white, this way or that way with no shades of gray. One way of noticing this is that they seem to hedge their statements with words like could, may, might, usually, often, sometimes, some, seem to, etc. This acknowledges that there are times when what they are saying might not apply.

There seem to be people out there who absolutely cannot stand the use of such hedge words. I work in an environment that tends to be dominated by ST types, and it's fairly common to have to put up with the "well is it or isn't it!" comment, or be in a situation where if you refuse to absolutely stand by a specific answer, it must mean that you don't know what you're talking about or are weak in opinion. I've had to learn to not use such words and just make a claim based on the probability of it being correct or not.

[Beautiful sky]

Like this: from another thread…the word "way" is a possibility Ne…eat it!!!!

But what if vengeance makes you feel good?

To answer the question in the OP: it depends.

the only way that I can see that it makes a person feel good is if it fuels more attitude of the same likeness.

[Aylen]

 

I think classical modal logic fits well with the concept of Delta Ne thinking. Modal logic describes things in terms of possibility and necessity, and explores how they intertwine.

* x is possible if x might be True (or might be False); x is not necessarily False
* x is necessary if x must be True (and cannot possibly be False); x is not possibly False
* x is contingent if x is not necessarily True (x might be True in a given case but might not be True in another case); x is not necessarily False and not necessarily True

rephrased in terms of alternate worlds:
* something is "possible" if it is True in at least one possible world.
* something is "necessary" if it is True in all possible worlds.

common modal words include:

usually, unusual
possibility, possibly, may, might, may be, could be, can
necessity, necessarily, not necessarily, must be, have to
impossibility, not possible, can't, couldn't

I use most of these words as a preemptive way of shutting people up. Not usually because I doubt what I am saying. It should be taken as given that nothing is going to apply in every situation but apparently it isn't. Otherwise some people get hung up on the words you use and lose the message. I wasted too much time debating my use of certain words like 'should" in the past because someone wanted to argue that there is nothing that they "should" do. Experience taught me that it is a real time saver to use words like "possibility", "could", might, "usually", etc... I prefer to argue over something other than word choice.

As much as it pains me to do so, I have to agree with sol on the Ne thing. I don't believe there is a delta Ne. There is just Ne and numerous ways to express it.

[The Exception]

Delta
-Ne = the unusual, alternative and bizarre. Despite its groundedness, this quadra respects unusual and talented people who offer creative alternative possibilities. The spread of new information is not impeded, no matter how avant-garde it might be. In Delta groups, there occur periodic flashes of sensationalism and spikes of interest centered around original people who put forward alternative ideas of development.

Alpha
+Ne = promising ideas. In this quadra, which can be attributed the element of air, there are frequent talks about the future, the unexplored and unknown possibilities. They may seem to be incorrigible dreamers. And this is so: they look out further than anyone, beyond the horizon, they put forward "crazy" theories and discuss them with pleasure. Some of these theories, however, are destined to have long lives, so long that they will outlast their creators.

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...Victor-Gulenko

I'll taket them both!

[ouronis]

Interesting. I've always narrowed this to Holographic Panoramic because this is very much how I think-especially the logic section. Of course I break my own rules(the modal logic rules) sometimes because I get bored of myself, while still knowing in the back of my mind they're true.

I'd be curious to see your analysis of the convergent Ne of Alphas and how it produces a different mindset.

Good job.

[wacey]

Sounds like holographical thinking of IEE as well has something to do with it.

Perhaps a lack of Se also in NFs because they are unsure of what will work and what will not.

Ne in delta is Ne- ? Which could influence even the positivists as they search for the not not.

NFs are notorious for requiring Te and delta ST, especially SLI are notorious for not sharing anything which makes for a combination of a lot of how to do this ,how to do that, where are you going, how long will it take, what is the best, least, moderate way of doing this, that, and the other thing. In short, lots of questions because Ne is about outside input of external stimuli.

Ne is infulenced by Fi which is heavily humanized in delta which leads to an pervasive attitude of reconciliation.

[anndelise]

Interesting. I've always narrowed this to Holographic Panoramic because this is very much how I think-especially the logic section. Of course I break my own rules(the modal logic rules) sometimes because I get bored of myself, while still knowing in the back of my mind they're true.

I'd be curious to see your analysis of the convergent Ne of Alphas and how it produces a different mindset.

Good job.

I haven't had the chance to sit down and pick the brain of an Alpha NT yet, so I'm not able to step into their shoes very well. Alpha Ne is positivist Ne with negativist Ti. Theoretically their Ne would be looking more for what is actually possible (not necessarily at this time, or with our current technology), or approach a theoretical idea as if it's true (for the moment), while their Ti would be what gets flipped around. I've unfairly accused a few alpha nt's of playing logic games, but now that I recognize that they are just flipping the Ti around a few times, that it's just me unable to follow with my weak Ti. The Ti would be used to explore the idea, and if for some reason the logical structure broke, they would probably try to form a different logical structure until they had one or more that worked. This wouldn't necessarily mean that they believed the idea/theory to be true.

We often get people coming in trying pretty hard to align socionics with some other theory (like enneagram). They get upset when it's criticized or rejected. And if a fault is pointed out to them, they'll get upset and 'rationalize' their pet theory some other way. I believe these people are Alpha NTs. Usually ILE.

(Note, this part might not be accurate: LII are generally easier for me to follow, I think because their ability to mentally flip the 4D Ti around so well means they can write their ideas out more clearly...and if they aren't clear to themselves, they tend to avoid giving their Ti reasons. This would be where they would prefer someone else give their reasons and then use that to help themselves determine where they stand on the idea. This is based on my observations and/or interactions with previous forumite self-typed LII, with one case of my not being able to understand one at all.)

Basically I think Alpha Ne is like taking an idea and running with it until it putters out or a more interesting one comes along.
I also think they make one of the best writers for sci-fi.

[anndelise]

Sounds like holographical thinking of IEE as well has something to do with it.

Perhaps a lack of Se also in NFs because they are unsure of what will work and what will not.

Ne in delta is Ne- ? Which could influence even the positivists as they search for the not not.

NFs are notorious for requiring Te and delta ST, especially SLI are notorious for not sharing anything which makes for a combination of a lot of how to do this ,how to do that, where are you going, how long will it take, what is the best, least, moderate way of doing this, that, and the other thing. In short, lots of questions because Ne is about outside input of external stimuli.

Ne is infulenced by Fi which is heavily humanized in delta which leads to an pervasive attitude of reconciliation.

Yes, the Ne- is the IEE's holographic-panoramic thinking, but Ne- also plays a role in EII's causal-deterministic thinking.

And yes, we definitely need that Te external input to help narrow down the possibilities in our minds (aka worrying about ).

The Fi+ influence has to do with the orientations (towards/away, attraction/repulsion, like/dislike, etc) that are most likely influencing a person. Which is why we are more considering differing points of view (as in through different eyes or in different shoes)...as that would be differing orientations to the topic. This would include being aware that there might be differing experiences, differing beliefs, differing goals/motivations, etc. Knowing what a pov's orientations are to the topic (their beliefs, experiences, attraction/repulsions, motivations/goals, etc to it) helps to drastically narrow down which possibilities might actually apply in their situation. (iow Fi+ narrows the Ne- alternatives.)

[Beautiful sky]

Yes, the Ne- is the IEE's holographic-panoramic thinking, but Ne- also plays a role in EII's causal-deterministic thinking.

And yes, we definitely need that Te external input to help narrow down the possibilities in our minds (aka worrying about ).

The Fi+ influence has to do with the orientations (towards/away, attraction/repulsion, like/dislike, etc) that are most likely influencing a person. Which is why we are more considering differing points of view (as in through different eyes or in different shoes)...as that would be differing orientations to the topic. This would include being aware that there might be differing experiences, differing beliefs, differing goals/motivations, etc. Knowing what a pov's orientations are to the topic (their beliefs, experiences, attraction/repulsions, motivations/goals, etc to it) helps to drastically narrow down which possibilities might actually apply in their situation. (iow Fi+ narrows the Ne- alternatives.)

All I can tell you as an EII I limit to a few narrow as opposed to expansive nature of Ne base. Take my IEE friends and I. They have a multitude of actual activities that they have gotten into like they'll take up yoga and God knows what else while I may take up a few of these and have interest in it for decades. They will get bored and drop it once all aspects of it has been explored and discovered.

Sounds like holographical thinking of IEE as well has something to do with it.

Perhaps a lack of Se also in NFs because they are unsure of what will work and what will not.

Ne in delta is Ne- ? Which could influence even the positivists as they search for the not not.

NFs are notorious for requiring Te and delta ST, especially SLI are notorious for not sharing anything which makes for a combination of a lot of how to do this ,how to do that, where are you going, how long will it take, what is the best, least, moderate way of doing this, that, and the other thing. In short, lots of questions because Ne is about outside input of external stimuli.

Ne is infulenced by Fi which is heavily humanized in delta which leads to an pervasive attitude of reconciliation.

I love this post wacey