thinking "outside the box"

[pianosinger]

Hmmm?

[Creepy-male]

I would think DCNH. Creative subs for sure.

[CILi]

Ne-Leading: Resents "the box," so pretty much oblivious to it

Ne-Creative: Accepts "the box," but pushes it to the very limit

Te: A "box" is...

[Aiss]

Stereotype is Ne. In practice, it depends.

Lenore Thompson's idea is that Ne is "outside the box", and Ni is "about the box". It actually makes some sort of sense when we consider Pi as context and Pe as content. Si/Ne has "box" and "inside/outside the box". Se/Ni is rather set points and flexible box. So in this case, it works. Except conventionally speaking, being flexible with the box is usually considered "outside the box".

I think it's kind of impossible to have outside the box without the box - especially in case of Ne-dominants, it's often clear that they need to have one and will make one up, even.

[Brilliand]

I recently happened across a psychology textbook lying in a dusty corner of my room... and happened to open it to a page speculating about how impressive creativity arises. It reminded me that most technically outside-the-box things are fairly stupid, and the impressiveness that gives outside-the-box thinking its good reputation comes from those who were able to find useful things outside the box. In order to do this, they had to be following a different box - not none at all (which would result in an exhaustive search of absolutely everything). Hence, outside-the-box thinking would probably involve a weak function of the person making the judgment (or when an impressionable person is making the judgment, whoever made the impression), and more likely a valued function as well, as unvalued functions would have more difficulty earning the good connotation that "outside the box" has. That's all uncertain, though. More clearly, inside-the-box thinking follows what is commonly known, and outside-the-box thinking uses some other method that is not usual in the culture.

[Marie84]

I guess to an extreme it would be +, which makes sense with being Alpha valued IE's. Basicall, spewing out potentialities and novelty and filtering information from subjective judgments

on the opposite spectrum, +

[FDG]

I would think DCNH. Creative subs for sure.

Yep.

[silverchris9]

No function thinks inside or outside the box; people think inside or outside the box, and what you consider "outside the box" is heavily influenced by quadra values/valued functions.

But in general, I see EP functions (Se and Ne) as inclined to be "outside the box," and IJ functions (Fi and Ti) as generally "box creators." So then, perhaps the EJ functions (Te and Fe) are "box defenders," while the IP functions don't give a shit about boxes and are preoccupied with other things.

[Words]

Good post by Silverchris.

I also thought to add that in terms of socionics, the second function is the area of creativity and the first function the area of 'security'.

Also, just to re-iterate, any type can be creative, come up with ideas, although you can maybe expect the type of idea can be different.

[1981slater]

The box=blue pill
Outside the box=red pill

[Aleksei]

/

[DividedsGhost]

...
It reminded me that most technically outside-the-box things are fairly stupid, and the impressiveness that gives outside-the-box thinking its good reputation comes from those who were able to find useful things outside the box.
...

I just want to add to this by saying that makes a security blanket for inside-the-box thinking. So I guess maybe outside-the-box thinking is in effect like delving into the unknown and trying to come out of it in tact and with some previously unknown knowledge. Hence why people that act out of 'the ordinary' or what people consider 'their ordinary' would easily get pegged as loony.

And here's a cat that likes to play inside and outside boxes.

[Logos]

Stereotype is Ne. In practice, it depends.

Agreed.

Lenore Thompson's idea is that Ne is "outside the box", and Ni is "about the box". It actually makes some sort of sense when we consider Pi as context and Pe as content. Si/Ne has "box" and "inside/outside the box". Se/Ni is rather set points and flexible box. So in this case, it works. Except conventionally speaking, being flexible with the box is usually considered "outside the box".

I think both Ne and Ni egos are capable of exhibiting both these behaviors, albeit in different ways and approaches. However, I always find the method by which one reaches these outside-the-box eureka moments to be far more interesting than the result itself. For example, there are a number of Ne-ego scientists or philosophers who generated their ideas while engaged in some sort of Si-related activity or stimulus.

I think it's kind of impossible to have outside the box without the box - especially in case of Ne-dominants, it's often clear that they need to have one and will make one up, even.

Ah yes, determining the "essence" of the "box" by defining parameters and stripping the qualities of the "box" to its base components.