On Ni

I wrote this definition on Ni in a discussion in the wiki; Jonathan thought it was very good, so here it goes --

The early socionists, including Augusta herself and Stratiyevskaya, emphasized a lot (too much imo) the "intuition of time" aspect of Ni. I see Ni as the inclination to wander off into your own internal imaginary world, going deep into it and following it for a while, rather than jump between different ones "on the surface", which is more Ne. That imaginary world is often reflections on the past and on the future, and what connects them; and also a consistent imaginary word such as a poem or a novel. The INTp Gore Vidal has described himself, in his youth, as always wandering off into his own imagination and "automatically" creating a whole novel, which he then "just" had to put into paper. That is also Ni. So all of the definitions you mentioned are aspects of Ni imo. But I grant you, again, that the early definitions emphasized too much the "time" thingy, which makes no sense with the INFp "romantic and dreamer" aspect.

Adding to that --

A Ni dominant has no problem with remaining a long, long time in Ni mode; for them, far better to do that than worry about pointless, changing, "factual" data (INFp) or about one's role in the context of social interactions emotionally (INTp).

A Ni HA type sees the value of doing that, but keeps wondering whether they're not doing it too much and if they should not get going.

A Ni dual-seeking type likes people who do that because they could restrain a bit their own impulsiveness by thinking of the consequences.

A Ni PoLR type sees no pont to that at all. Wander off in your thoughts? Fine, but only if to solve the problem that's in front of you -- all the rest is self-indulging in pointless and lazy "daydreaming". Ni my ass! Get to work!

Ni sounds like a pretty fun function really. I can relate to what you said that Ne imaginations are perhaps more fleeting. I tend to drift off into my imaginations quite often but i will imagine a really short situation. For example i will imagine myself handling a social situation in a different way (being funny/smooth etc). It only seems to last for a short time though.

So if you have Ni in your ego block can you sit and just slip into your internal story when your feeling bored?

What would be the difference between Ni accepting / Ni creating?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by meatburger

Ni sounds like a pretty fun function really. I can relate to what you said that Ne imaginations are perhaps more fleeting. I tend to drift off into my imaginations quite often but i will imagine a really short situation. For example i will imagine myself handling a social situation in a different way (being funny/smooth etc). It only seems to last for a short time though.

---

As ENFp, you can use Ni very easily, but as you said, for short times -- for longer times it's boring to you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by meatburger

So if you have Ni in your ego block can you sit and just slip into your internal story when your feeling bored?

---

Yes, but if you are Ni dominant, you'll want to do that even if not bored.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by meatburger

What would be the difference between Ni accepting / Ni creating?

---

The difference is that getting into Ni-mode, for ENTjs and ENFjs, is not really the most natural state -- it's a state to sort of "gather information" to act with Te or Fe. An ENTj or ENFj who wanders off too long in Ni mode begins to feel useless and restless.

That's why I prefer to call :Ni: sequential progression: "this happens, followed by this, followed by this...." An abstract story, in other words.

Time is sequential progression, but sequential progression is not "time", at least in the physical sense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Expat

Adding to that --

A Ni dominant has no problem with remaining a long, long time in Ni mode; for them, far better to do that than worry about pointless, changing, "factual" data (INFp) or about one's role in the context of social interactions emotionally (INTp).

A Ni HA type sees the value of doing that, but keeps wondering whether they're not doing it too much and if they should not get going.

A Ni dual-seeking type likes people who do that because they could restrain a bit their own impulsiveness by thinking of the consequences.

A Ni PoLR type sees no pont to that at all. Wander off in your thoughts? Fine, but only if to solve the problem that's in front of you -- all the rest is self-indulging in pointless and lazy "daydreaming". Ni my ass! Get to work!

---

I do it but I am always thinking that I do it too much and I need to pull myself out of it (which is relatively easy to do) with distractions from the physical world. I don't spend very much time in Ni mode each time I'm there. But these imaginings do pop up often. What I mean is, many times throughout the day but not for long periods of time each occasion.

I'm always daydreaming... and can be surprised by people easily when I'm doing it.

Sometimes I can be talking to someone, and then focus on something behind them and seem to be staring, and just stop mid-sentence. I have to force myself to continue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redbaron

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Expat

Adding to that --

A Ni dominant has no problem with remaining a long, long time in Ni mode; for them, far better to do that than worry about pointless, changing, "factual" data (INFp) or about one's role in the context of social interactions emotionally (INTp).

A Ni HA type sees the value of doing that, but keeps wondering whether they're not doing it too much and if they should not get going.

A Ni dual-seeking type likes people who do that because they could restrain a bit their own impulsiveness by thinking of the consequences.

A Ni PoLR type sees no pont to that at all. Wander off in your thoughts? Fine, but only if to solve the problem that's in front of you -- all the rest is self-indulging in pointless and lazy "daydreaming". Ni my ass! Get to work!

---

I do it but I am always thinking that I do it too much and I need to pull myself out of it (which is relatively easy to do) with distractions from the physical world. I don't spend very much time in Ni mode each time I'm there. But these imaginings do pop up often. What I mean is, many times throughout the day but not for long periods of time each occasion.

---

my infp man says that he does do this Ni thing as a natural course, but when young realized that he had to take actions to realize dreams, otherwise he would not accomplish anything. so redbaron it sounds like you are saying the same thing. i think it's Ni with a strong Se dual seeking.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tcaudilllg

That's why I prefer to call :Ni: sequential progression: "this happens, followed by this, followed by this...." An abstract story, in other words.

Time is sequential progression, but sequential progression is not "time", at least in the physical sense.

---

Not bad at all.

I use Ni in the "practical" sense, as a kind of warning system: "If I do this, then this will probably happen...I should reconsider." But not really in the daydreaming sense; I go off in my head sometimes, but not so much in the way described here.

I'll take a pink triangle over a white one every time.


Very nice description, it helped me a lot with a few difficult typings.

That description of Ni is very important. It covers one of the most important aspects of Ni. I am still surprised that other people can't automatically dream whatever they want.

However this description of Ni depicts it as purely idle, but that is not true. Ni has many other capabilities, as a primary function anyways.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Expat

I wrote this definition on Ni in a discussion in the wiki; Jonathan thought it was very good, so here it goes --

The early socionists, including Augusta herself and Stratiyevskaya, emphasized a lot (too much imo) the "intuition of time" aspect of Ni. I see Ni as the inclination to wander off into your own internal imaginary world, going deep into it and following it for a while, rather than jump between different ones "on the surface", which is more Ne. That imaginary world is often reflections on the past and on the future, and what connects them; and also a consistent imaginary word such as a poem or a novel. The INTp Gore Vidal has described himself, in his youth, as always wandering off into his own imagination and "automatically" creating a whole novel, which he then "just" had to put into paper. That is also Ni. So all of the definitions you mentioned are aspects of Ni imo. But I grant you, again, that the early definitions emphasized too much the "time" thingy, which makes no sense with the INFp "romantic and dreamer" aspect.

Adding to that --

A Ni dominant has no problem with remaining a long, long time in Ni mode; for them, far better to do that than worry about pointless, changing, "factual" data (INFp) or about one's role in the context of social interactions emotionally (INTp).

A Ni HA type sees the value of doing that, but keeps wondering whether they're not doing it too much and if they should not get going.

A Ni dual-seeking type likes people who do that because they could restrain a bit their own impulsiveness by thinking of the consequences.

A Ni PoLR type sees no pont to that at all. Wander off in your thoughts? Fine, but only if to solve the problem that's in front of you -- all the rest is self-indulging in pointless and lazy "daydreaming". Ni my ass! Get to work!

---

this is interesting to me. i recently got into an argument with a friend of mine who i am fairly sure is intuitive. possibly :Ni: as well.

we were at a convenience store and i picked up a $1.99 bagel because i wanted one bagel with cream cheese and a soda. he then went into detail about why my bagel purchase was a sorry idea because i could just get a pack of 12 bagels and some cream cheese at the store for a comparable price and save money that way. but i only wanted one bagel with cream cheese and honestly i rarely eat bagels in the first place. the likelihood that the 12 pack bagels would have spoiled and that the cream cheese would have gone rancid before i even ate the other 12 made buying bagels in bulk seem ridiculous to me. he continued to argue with me about how that $1.99 bagel + soda purchase multiplied by 3 (3xday), by 30 days out of the month, by 12 months a year, was costing me a ton of money. he completely ignored the fact that eating bagels and sodas 3 times a day is incredibly unlikely and something i'd never do. (i think heathiep would agree that bagels and sodas for a year would be a completely unhealthy and unbalanced diet.)


completely ignoring the health factor involved, a budget of 3.24 (+ tax)/meal is actually around the $10/day budget that more "thrifty" shoppers like to maintain. this actually seemed really unreasonable to me and i was actually bothered that my single bagel purchase was "such a big deal."

That's hilarious implied. It seems that your friend places a higher priority on money that on his needs. That is, he will eat something if it is cheap rather then go and buy that something that he wants to eat regardless of price.

The whole "sales" culture is based on this kind of thinking in my opinion. It must be either Ni or Te.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dioklecian

That's hilarious implied. It seems that your friend places a higher priority on money that on his needs. That is, he will eat something if it is cheap rather then go and buy that something that he wants to eat regardless of price.

The whole "sales" culture is based on this kind of thinking in my opinion. It must be either Ni or Te.

---

i agree. i think there should be a fair balance between money & needs. my mother does the same sort of "buying in bulk" with products that you really shouldn't buy in bulk in the first place, products that go rancid quickly in the summertime. my dad criticizes her about this because it winds up being a waste of money in the long run as well. it does seem like :Ni: or :Te:, but it confuses me nevertheless. it could be some sort of subconscious form of this. i really have no clue. to me, there are more factors than just cheapness. for instance, cubans are said to have access to free food, but who really wants to eat the "free food" in cuba when it's of such a poor quality that it isn't even worth eating or sustaining a diet on? same thing goes for free healthcare, sometimes, although there are some instances in other countries where this seems to work well.


i'm reminded of this.

I must have lots of Ni. :shock: How does that work?

Wow! Expat, this is really the best description of :Ni: I have seen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Minde

I must have lots of Ni. :shock: How does that work?

---

Do you really think that you are INFj???!?!?!? :O

From here it is clear you be INFp dear. You can get a guess just by the way you title your posts. LOL But, really, it is apparent from other reasons also. (Spiritual life, etc.)

But really, great description of :Ni: if it gets converts.

Expat is my new god.

.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thunder

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Transigent

Expat is my new god.

---

Yeah...

---

Without wanting to dumpen this enthusiasm, I should point out, as a Ni dominat, that to see your inner vision is not a function in the Jungian sense. A function has to do just that: provide you a function in the world and society, direct your life.

Daydreaming is not a profession! (unfortunately :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Transigent

Do you really think that you are INFj???!?!?!? :O

From here it is clear you be INFp dear. You can get a guess just by the way you title your posts. LOL But, really, it is apparent from other reasons also. (Spiritual life, etc.)

---

Ooh, this is exciting. The first real challenge to my type.

... The way I title my posts? O.o

Quote:

---

This doesn't make sense to me. Problem resolution is what I do.

*If solving the problem does not contribute to my development or to the development of others, then it's insignificant.
*I can't solve your problems for you. The most I can do is coach/guide you through the process.
*I require feedback so that I can assess and correct my performance.

---

Koshi: that's exactly why I'm here, too. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Diana

Noo Transigent, Minde is Fi! And if you have strong Ne you have decent Ni as well. :)

---

What's interesting here is...assuming that Minde is right that she's FiNe...might FiNe ever appear to use something like Ni that is really FiNe?
That is to say, might using acc-Fi in a way that focuses Ne a bit result in a sort of imagination activity that's different from Ni imagination? And if so, how would one tell the difference?

Similarly, suppose one dwells for awhile in an imagination of a very appealing sensory world....would that be some sort of mixture of Ni and Si? would imagining some sort of internal structures be combining Ni and Ti? I suppose considering Tcaud's ideas one might consider these cases of Si or Ti exertion (or maybe it's the other way around....Ni exertion)?

I don't think vidal is INTP IMO, his father was INTP prob.

I think that he is ENTJ. (compare to Lord Conrad Black).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dioklecian

I don't think vidal is INTP IMO, his father was INTP prob.

I think that he is ENTJ. (compare to Lord Conrad Black).

---

I think you've got it totally backwards. Lord Black is much more likely ESTp, Gene Vidal was ESTj, and Vidal is INTp.

EDIT: ENFj is another possibility for Black. But I find it less likely due to his "hobby" of writing biographies - first of FDR, now of Nixon - which strikes me as a typical use of Te as 8th function.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jonathan

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Diana

Noo Transigent, Minde is Fi! And if you have strong Ne you have decent Ni as well. :)

---

What's interesting here is...assuming that Minde is right that she's FiNe...might FiNe ever appear to use something like Ni that is really FiNe?
That is to say, might using acc-Fi in a way that focuses Ne a bit result in a sort of imagination activity that's different from Ni imagination? And if so, how would one tell the difference?

Similarly, suppose one dwells for awhile in an imagination of a very appealing sensory world....would that be some sort of mixture of Ni and Si? would imagining some sort of internal structures be combining Ni and Ti? I suppose considering Tcaud's ideas one might consider these cases of Si or Ti exertion (or maybe it's the other way around....Ni exertion)?

---

You're making it much more complicated than it is.

An INFj can use Ni quite easily, just like an ENFj can use Ne easily. But Fi remains the INFj's main way of looking at the world.

Thanks a lot for that description. I didn't actually understand what my dominant function meant but now it's totally clear to me. ;) BTW I'm INTp and my sister is INFp and we've got the same problem. When we read a book we often suddenly realize that we've already read few pages thinking about completely something else. That must be Ni's fault!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dioklecian

Without wanting to dumpen this enthusiasm, I should point out, as a Ni dominat, that to see your inner vision is not a function in the Jungian sense. A function has to do just that: provide you a function in the world and society, direct your life.

---

That has ZERO to do with the meaning of "function" in socionics.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dioklecian

Daydreaming is not a profession! (unfortunately :(

---

I think authors and perhaps composers might disagree.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilly

I use Ni in the "practical" sense, as a kind of warning system: "If I do this, then this will probably happen...I should reconsider." But not really in the daydreaming sense; I go off in my head sometimes, but not so much in the way described here.

---

Yes, what I described was really more for strong Ni dominants. What you have described is not going that deep into Ni mode.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Expat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dioklecian

Daydreaming is not a profession! (unfortunately :(

---

I think authors and perhaps composers might disagree.

---

agree. it can be a rather good profession if you're good enough at it (think of the money made from harry potter books.)

@Jonathan: you seem to be attempting to reduce a person's mental processes to their ego. So if Minde as INFj identifies with a description of :Ni: , rather than see that as a natural use of the 8th function, you try to explain it as "maybe not :Ni: , maybe :Fi: and :Ne: that looks like :Ni: ".

Know this: that path leads to a swamp of confusion. The beauty of model A - which is still rather complex, is it not - is that it manages to deconstruct the human psyche in a model of functions of varying degrees of preference of use, which is what determines how people interact. What you are doing is to try to dump all functions onto the ego, thereby making the ego so complicated as to make any intertype relationship analysis impractical.

I also use :Si: and :Fe: . Why don't you try to explain my use of :Fe: as "maybe not :Fe: , maybe a combination of :Te: and :Ni: and, hmm, :Fi: that just look like :Fe: ?" Good luck with that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hashish

When we read a book we often suddenly realise that we've already read a few pages thinking about something completely different.

---

I do that too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by implied

agree. it can be a rather good profession if you're good enough at it (think of the money made from harry potter books.)

---

Aha, great example! But of course she also had to actually write down her thoughts on paper, which some may never get to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Diana

Noo Transigent, Minde is Fi! And if you have strong Ne you have decent Ni as well. :)

---

I mean, who can be sure of these things, but I am as sure as I can be. I dunno, I kinda got a 6th sense for some Betas, has to do with :Ni: and :Ti:. Minde is definitely an INFp, but I have already failed to convince one INFp of their INFpenis, so I doubt I could ever succeed. (Even though UDP is kinda different INFp wise, the evidence is still there.)

Hell, there are some folks on here, who have been changing types and such, being very confused, when it is kinda clear to me what types they are. There are certain things that people say and do that have importance in considering type, and some other things that are insignificant. Trying to determine which things is...well, it is pretty damn hard to do, but crucial when you try to pick out types.

And you gotta do it for all the types. Like, I am better at picking Beta-S types out then Alpha-S types, and I was complete shit at finding INTj's until a while ago.

Of course, nobody is as serious about this stuff as I sound here, but it just comes to you if your interested and interact with lots of people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dioklecian

Without wanting to dumpen this enthusiasm, I should point out, as a Ni dominat, that to see your inner vision is not a function in the Jungian sense. A function has to do just that: provide you a function in the world and society, direct your life.

---

Are you so stupid as to think that you are some kind of INxp??????!?!?!?

You ain't. I think your dual seeking could be intuition, so you mistake an obsession with what you actually are. If you are intuitive, then you must be really stupid in any case.

If I remember correctly, I think we determined you were ESFp. I haven't ever seen any reason to change this diagnosis.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KSpin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hashish

When we read a book we often suddenly realise that we've already read a few pages thinking about something completely different.

---

I do that too.

---

Yeah so do i! In fact i did it about an hour ago reading my uni readings. They got a little boring so i started thinking about something else lol. Is that totally Ni? If it is i wonder what the difference between you and i doing it is? Ni is conscious for you so do you realise your not reading it but dont mind? I dont even register im not reading it i totally forget what im doing. Then i go oh shit now ive got to back track.

That's just a concentration problem. Every type for example, when being intensely infatuated, will think about the object of the infatuation instead of studying - even strong sensing types.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FDG

That's just a concentration problem. Every type for example, when being intensely infatuated, will think about the object of the infatuation instead of studying - even strong sensing types.

---

Yeah that was what i was thinking. I think it is just about concentration in the above situation. I wasn't daydreaming per say i was just thinking about something else. Wikipedia seems to make a distinction between mind-wandering and daydreaming.

Heres another example. I was just watching this korean movie called the host and "boom" this question came into my head and i started thinking about it. The question was like "so whats the difference between subconscious Ni and conscious Ni?" Daydreaming intrudes upon my life i never actually actively persue it but i suspect its the same for Ni dominants aswell. I suppose this is because it is an introverted function?

@ Transigent

(so as not to derail)

http://www.webmd.com/balance/feature...t-such-bad-rap

I don't see Ni as the "daydreaming function".
I see it as a thing that humans do.
Each type, however, may do it differently, or have different focuses within it.
I don't see Ni's location within model A as being a decent explanation of these differences.

daydreaming is probably an Introvert thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anndelise

I don't see Ni as the "daydreaming function".
I see it as a thing that humans do.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jarno

daydreaming is probably an Introvert thing.

---

Anyone else agrees? Is building up whole consistent stories (like Gore Vidal or JK Rowling) in your minds, spontaneously, just what humans or introverts (no, I am not implying that introverts aren't human) do? Anyone else agrees?

Ni may affect what you day-dream about, then?

I usually go off into my head about what would happen had this happened in the story... and then realise that I've been reading the words but they haven't been registering. Like I'm blocking out a voice in my own head.

Sometimes I wonder whether I speak the words I'm reading in my head, or whether their meaning just comes to me. If you get what I mean.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Expat

Anyone else agrees?

---

I guess I would agree as I do relate. And I will second FDG's comment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KSpin

"When my time comes, forget the wrong that I've done.
Help me leave behind some reasons to be missed."

---

That's strong. Where does that quote come from?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Winterpark

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KSpin

"When my time comes, forget the wrong that I've done.
Help me leave behind some reasons to be missed."

---

That's strong. Where does that quote come from?

---

Leave Out All The Rest by Linkin Park.

I daydream like crazy and always have. I don't see how this is limited to Ni dominant types. Maybe it's an intuitive thing and different intuitives do it differently? I don't know.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KSpin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Winterpark

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KSpin

"When my time comes, forget the wrong that I've done.
Help me leave behind some reasons to be missed."

---

That's strong. Where does that quote come from?

---

Leave Out All The Rest by Linkin Park.

---

Thanks. I wonder if someone can socionize it.

.

That seems like the exact opposite of how it should be.

Still doesn't make sense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kioshi

I might run multiple scenarios through my mind. They are generally very short and simple sequences, nothing on the scale you are talking about. My NeFi friend has the more story-like images. Though the best stories come when we make them up together. Like I might suggest a posisble scenario and then she will flesh it out. If she suggests a scenario, then I am most like to respond with an alternative. Ultimately our goal seems to be to see how messed up we can make the life of some character before abandoning it for another. I don't do this sort of thing spontaneously. She is definitely the one making it happen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilly

That seems like the exact opposite of how it should be.

---

---

opposite?
what kioshi wrote seems to fit the enfp-narrator infp-taciturn thing

what doesn't make sense to you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Expat

@Jonathan: you seem to be attempting to reduce a person's mental processes to their ego. So if Minde as INFj identifies with a description of :Ni: , rather than see that as a natural use of the 8th function, you try to explain it as "maybe not :Ni: , maybe :Fi: and :Ne: that looks like :Ni: ".

Know this: that path leads to a swamp of confusion. The beauty of model A - which is still rather complex, is it not - is that it manages to deconstruct the human psyche in a model of functions of varying degrees of preference of use, which is what determines how people interact. What you are doing is to try to dump all functions onto the ego, thereby making the ego so complicated as to make any intertype relationship analysis impractical.

I also use :Si: and :Fe: . Why don't you try to explain my use of :Fe: as "maybe not :Fe: , maybe a combination of :Te: and :Ni: and, hmm, :Fi: that just look like :Fe: ?" Good luck with that.

---

Actually, I'm not trying to do that; sorry if it sounded like that. I've mentioned many times that I disagree with those who tries to reduce people to their ego block.

What I was doing was speculating that Ne in an INj person may have some similarities to Ni because it's "focused" by the rational function. Other people have suggested similar things in the past. I was merely trying to assess people's reaction to that idea, not proposing it as a definite thing.

Also, it does seem to me that perhaps people of different types who use Ni do seem to use it in a way that has a different "flavor," and I was trying to see if anyone noticed that or had interesting things to say on that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Diana

Yes. Everyone's mind wanders, everyone daydreams. Just like dreaming at night is a function of the human brain and how it works, so I think is daydreaming. But how long a person does it, how deep they go following one track, and whether it leaves them refreshed or utterly drained is something else.

---

Thank you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Slacker Mom

I daydream like crazy and always have. I don't see how this is limited to Ni dominant types. Maybe it's an intuitive thing and different intuitives do it differently? I don't know.

---

No function is limited to its dominant types.

To focus your thoughts on the taste of red wine, chocolate cake, or on the warm sensation of a hot bath - while not thinking of anything else much - is :Si: . But who'd say that only Si dominants do that?

Everyone uses all functions, and the difference is what Diana mentioned. So to say "this is what everyone does " - ok, this can be applied to all functions. So?

Daydreaming helps you to:
Relax
Manage Conflict
Mentally Rehearse
Review Events
Maintain Relationships and the Emotions Involved
Relieve Boredom

So, how do you propose using this Ni=daydreaming theory to cover the above aspects/uses of daydreaming in Model A and/or the whole id, super-id, ego, and super-ego thing?

Can you first tell me what your view of Ni is, apart from "internal dynamics of fields"?

Ni = daydreaming is a gross oversimplification of what I said, by the way. But please tell me how you'd define it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Expat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dioklecian

I don't think vidal is INTP IMO, his father was INTP prob.

I think that he is ENTJ. (compare to Lord Conrad Black).

---

I think you've got it totally backwards. Lord Black is much more likely ESTp, Gene Vidal was ESTj, and Vidal is INTp.

EDIT: ENFj is another possibility for Black. But I find it less likely due to his "hobby" of writing biographies - first of FDR, now of Nixon - which strikes me as a typical use of Te as 8th function.

---

His father could have been been ESTJ, I am not sure, there isn't enough info online, however the other 2 are ENTJs. Conrad Black's wife is ESTJ by teh way. And both he and the younger Vidal have the same misguided idea of what being is involved in being an aristocrat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Expat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jonathan

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Diana

Noo Transigent, Minde is Fi! And if you have strong Ne you have decent Ni as well. :)

---

What's interesting here is...assuming that Minde is right that she's FiNe...might FiNe ever appear to use something like Ni that is really FiNe?
That is to say, might using acc-Fi in a way that focuses Ne a bit result in a sort of imagination activity that's different from Ni imagination? And if so, how would one tell the difference?

Similarly, suppose one dwells for awhile in an imagination of a very appealing sensory world....would that be some sort of mixture of Ni and Si? would imagining some sort of internal structures be combining Ni and Ti? I suppose considering Tcaud's ideas one might consider these cases of Si or Ti exertion (or maybe it's the other way around....Ni exertion)?

---

You're making it much more complicated than it is.

An INFj can use Ni quite easily, just like an ENFj can use Ne easily. But Fi remains the INFj's main way of looking at the world.

---

I can't use Ne easily as compared to my Ne dominant father and sister.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Expat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dioklecian

Without wanting to dumpen this enthusiasm, I should point out, as a Ni dominat, that to see your inner vision is not a function in the Jungian sense. A function has to do just that: provide you a function in the world and society, direct your life.

---

That has ZERO to do with the meaning of "function" in socionics.

.

---

I think that functions are the same in socionics as in Jung.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Expat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dioklecian

]
Daydreaming is not a profession! (unfortunately :(

---

I think authors and perhaps composers might disagree.

.

---

Art is not about daydreaming, daydreaming is very useful, but to get published you need much much more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by implied

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Expat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dioklecian

Daydreaming is not a profession! (unfortunately :(

---

I think authors and perhaps composers might disagree.

---

agree. it can be a rather good profession if you're good enough at it (think of the money made from harry potter books.)

---

You should take up a career in daydreaming then :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KSpin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hashish

When we read a book we often suddenly realise that we've already read a few pages thinking about something completely different.

---

I do that too.

---

Me too, but that's just absentmindeness, my ENTP father does the same.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thunder

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Expat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dioklecian

Daydreaming is not a profession! (unfortunately :(

---

I think authors and perhaps composers might disagree.

---

Haha, definitely!

---

You should ask THEM.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Transigent

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Diana

Noo Transigent, Minde is Fi! And if you have strong Ne you have decent Ni as well. :)

---

I mean, who can be sure of these things, but I am as sure as I can be. I dunno, I kinda got a 6th sense for some Betas, has to do with :Ni: and :Ti:. Minde is definitely an INFp, but I have already failed to convince one INFp of their INFpenis, so I doubt I could ever succeed. (Even though UDP is kinda different INFp wise, the evidence is still there.)

Hell, there are some folks on here, who have been changing types and such, being very confused, when it is kinda clear to me what types they are. There are certain things that people say and do that have importance in considering type, and some other things that are insignificant. Trying to determine which things is...well, it is pretty damn hard to do, but crucial when you try to pick out types.

And you gotta do it for all the types. Like, I am better at picking Beta-S types out then Alpha-S types, and I was complete shit at finding INTj's until a while ago.

Of course, nobody is as serious about this stuff as I sound here, but it just comes to you if your interested and interact with lots of people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dioklecian

Without wanting to dumpen this enthusiasm, I should point out, as a Ni dominat, that to see your inner vision is not a function in the Jungian sense. A function has to do just that: provide you a function in the world and society, direct your life.

---

Are you so stupid as to think that you are some kind of INxp??????!?!?!?

You ain't. I think your dual seeking could be intuition, so you mistake an obsession with what you actually are. If you are intuitive, then you must be really stupid in any case.

If I remember correctly, I think we determined you were ESFp. I haven't ever seen any reason to change this diagnosis.

---

Go f yourself you virgin.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Expat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anndelise

I don't see Ni as the "daydreaming function".
I see it as a thing that humans do.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jarno

daydreaming is probably an Introvert thing.

---

Anyone else agrees? Is building up whole consistent stories (like Gore Vidal or JK Rowling) in your minds, spontaneously, just what humans or introverts (no, I am not implying that introverts aren't human) do? Anyone else agrees?

---

Rowling is ISFJ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dioklecian

His father could have been been ESTJ, I am not sure, there isn't enough info online, however the other 2 are ENTJs. Conrad Black's wife is ESTJ by teh way. And both he and the younger Vidal have the same misguided idea of what being is involved in being an aristocrat.

---

You haven't got a clue about these people, or about the types.

Barbara Amiel is ESTj? How? Why? She is sheer :Fe: and :Se: . Do you even know what it means to be ESTj in socionics? Based on what do you make this kind of assertions? Like the argument you used to type Augustus as INTp, "his statues sort of look like Putin"?

EDIT: and ok, Transigent insulted you, you insulted him back. Now drop it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anndelise

Daydreaming helps you to:
Relax
Manage Conflict
Mentally Rehearse
Review Events
Maintain Relationships and the Emotions Involved
Relieve Boredom

So, how do you propose using this Ni=daydreaming theory to cover the above aspects/uses of daydreaming in Model A and/or the whole id, super-id, ego, and super-ego thing?

---

I agree with many of Ann's points in this thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Expat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dioklecian

His father could have been been ESTJ, I am not sure, there isn't enough info online, however the other 2 are ENTJs. Conrad Black's wife is ESTJ by teh way. And both he and the younger Vidal have the same misguided idea of what being is involved in being an aristocrat.

---

You haven't got a clue about these people, or about the types.

Barbara Amiel is ESTj? How? Why? She is sheer :Fe: and :Se: . Do you even know what it means to be ESTj in socionics? Based on what do you make this kind of assertions? Like the argument you used to type Augustus as INTp, "his statues sort of look like Putin"?

EDIT: and ok, Transigent insulted you, you insulted him back. Now drop it.

---

If you will use the impolite style of transgender guy, I will not respond to you anymore. [u]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dioklecian

If you will use the impolite style of transgender guy, I will not respond to you anymore. [u]

---

Dio, you may ignore me all you wish, but I told you to drop the matter with Transigent, so I'm kicking you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Expat

Ni = daydreaming is a gross oversimplification of what I said

---

For starters, I was not the only one who interpreted what you were saying as suggesting that daydreaming = Ni or Ni = daydreaming. Nor am I the only one who used the term daydreaming in referring to your theory. In fact, you yourself have suggested that Ni is "building up whole consistent stories in your minds, spontaneously" yourself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Expat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anndelise

I don't see Ni as the "daydreaming function".
I see it as a thing that humans do."

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jarno

daydreaming is probably an Introvert thing

---

Anyone else agrees? Is building up whole consistent stories () in your minds, spontaneously, just what humans or introverts () do? Anyone else agrees?

---

A number of people who are not Ni base, creative, nor polr have said that they daydream a lot. Admittedly, some may have been referring to "mind-wandering" (though I've no idea what the difference is between daydreaming and mind-wandering as most people use those terms synonymously.) Yet, you didn't accuse them of oversimplifying what you said. Is it any wonder, then, if I might be misinterpreting what you're trying to say?

***

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Expat

@Jonathan: you seem to be attempting to reduce a person's mental processes to their ego. So if Minde as INFj identifies with a description of
Ni, rather than see that as a natural use of the 8th function, you try to explain it as "maybe not Ni, maybe Fi and Ne that looks like Ni".

Know this: that path leads to a swamp of confusion. The beauty of model A - which is still rather complex, is it not - is that it manages to deconstruct the human psyche in a model of functions of varying degrees of preference of use, which is what determines how people interact. What you are doing is to try to dump all functions onto the ego, thereby making the ego so complicated as to make any intertype relationship analysis impractical.

---

I suppose he could be overcomplicating the ego, though it's just as likely some people are attempting to oversimplify it.

This is where my questions regarding how the Ni=daydreaming/storybuilding fit into model A and the id/ego stuff came in. But I'm assuming first something else would need to be cleared up….

I see the functions as INFORMATION elements (as in types of information our minds are capable of processing), not as actions in and of themselves. Daydreaming is an action that can be active and/or passive. Mind-wandering is an action though likely a passive one. "spontaneously building up whole consistent stories in your minds" is an action that can be active and/or passive (some people might even link this to the narrator dichotomy). I'm having a really hard time finding the INFORMATION in any of these. Perhaps you can clarify it for me?

I don't think Expat is trying to say or imply that ALL daydreaming is related to Ni, but rather that one manifestation of Ni is a very particular kind of daydreaming in which a sequential scenario is developed and followed over a long period of time.

Expat, I'm curious: how would writing biographies be more easily attributed to Te as an 8th function than a 1st?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilly

I don't think Expat is trying to say or imply that ALL daydreaming is related to Ni, but rather that one manifestation of Ni is a very particular kind of daydreaming in which a sequential scenario is developed and followed over a long period of time.

---

Would this include me attempting to work a new character into Harry Potter? Someone that I believe is lacking (no it's not myself, heh)? I've done it before with other stories... whilst I'm trying to drift off to sleep, attempted to see how the story could have been made a little bit better, or expanded.

I'm not going to pass judgment on this one, but it would appear to fall under Expat's interpretation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KSpin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilly

I don't think Expat is trying to say or imply that ALL daydreaming is related to Ni, but rather that one manifestation of Ni is a very particular kind of daydreaming in which a sequential scenario is developed and followed over a long period of time.

---

Would this include me attempting to work a new character into Harry Potter? Someone that I believe is lacking (no it's not myself, heh)? I've done it before with other stories... whilst I'm trying to drift off to sleep, attempted to see how the story could have been made a little bit better, or expanded.

---

Yes, I think so, and Gilly does know what I mean.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilly

Expat, I'm curious: how would writing biographies be more easily attributed to Te as an 8th function than a 1st?

---

Generally speaking, it wouldn't. I am was referring to Lord Black's case only. As far as I know (and I don't know that much about him), writing biographies is sort of a hobby, which he does somewhat leisurely. Despite his career as a newpaper tycoon, writing non-fiction himself doesn't seem to be a main interest. He wrote his first biography, on FDR, basically because he had a long fascination for FDR and a vast collection of papers and memorablia, and based his biography largely on those.

I wouldn't have said that Black is Ti EP based only on that, though. It fits my general impression of him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anndelise

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Expat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anndelise

I don't see Ni as the "daydreaming function".
I see it as a thing that humans do."

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jarno

daydreaming is probably an Introvert thing

---

Anyone else agrees? Is building up whole consistent stories () in your minds, spontaneously, just what humans or introverts () do? Anyone else agrees?

---

A number of people who are not Ni base, creative, nor polr have said that they daydream a lot. Admittedly, some may have been referring to "mind-wandering" (though I've no idea what the difference is between daydreaming and mind-wandering as most people use those terms synonymously.) Yet, you didn't accuse them of oversimplifying what you said. Is it any wonder, then, if I might be misinterpreting what you're trying to say?

---

Perhaps it isn't any wonder.

Anyway, note that even in the quote above, I tried to explain what I meant more precisely than "daydreaming".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anndelise

I see the functions as INFORMATION elements (as in types of information our minds are capable of processing), not as actions in and of themselves. Daydreaming is an action that can be active and/or passive. Mind-wandering is an action though likely a passive one. "spontaneously building up whole consistent stories in your minds" is an action that can be active and/or passive (some people might even link this to the narrator dichotomy). I'm having a really hard time finding the INFORMATION in any of these. Perhaps you can clarify it for me?

---

You're asking me to frame MY understanding of functions the same way YOU frame them. I never stopped for a moment to wonder about whether "information elements" is a good name or not.

I have written my own views on the functions before, especially in the "Te views thread" in Gamma. I think that, for instance, to see :Se: as a pure "information element"' in the sense of "perceiving information" makes one overlook the very significant aspect of Se in terms of driving someone to take action. The same for all the functions.

So, strong Ni leads one to tap into their own thoughts away from the immediate physical reality - as Augusta said, "his thoughts are not in the now, but in what was or will be" - which is closer to the "intuition of time" aspect, which as I have said is too limiting since it does not take into account the "dreamer" aspect more usually associated with INFps. If you are tapping into your own thoughts away from physical reality, that becomes also a source of "information", does it not?

The "sequential process" as Gilly described - "if I do this, this will happen, and then this" - is another, less "out there" manifestation of the same inclination.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anndelise

This is where my questions regarding how the Ni=daydreaming/storybuilding fit into model A and the id/ego stuff came in. .

---

The way I see it, simplistically, it is this:

- Ni as base: a strong preference for inner reflection for long periods of time, following consistent scenarios, either totally imaginary (writing a novel) or following scenarios about the future or the past. I see the "novel-writing" bit as "über-Ni" if you will, just like sinking in a hot tub for hours while drinking wine and listening to music, while not thinking of anything else, is über-Si. In the case of Ni as base, the scenarios and/or sequential thoughts will be connected either to the Te reality or the Fe reality.

- Ni as creative: this is more visible in the "sequential thought" and "future scenarios" aspect, since it is "at the service" of Te and Fe. With Te - is this going to work in the longer term? With Fe - what will be their emotional response in the longer term?

- Ni as role: relatively little inclination to do the above as the person keeps "coming back" to the Si immediate reality of what they are sensing and what's in front of them.

- Ni as PoLR: of course Si EJs also "daydream", but they don't priorize it at all in relation to reacting to what's in front of them, and would have difficulty doing that the way a Ni IP does - they'd keep thinking they have to do something "real". And who can guess what will happen anyway? Better to deal with things as they come. Etc.

- Ni as dual-seeking: Se EPs are inclined to do things impulsively, following their Se perceptions and drives, without thinking of the consequences - but very often wishing they had, so they are attracted to people who think up what-could-happen scenarios before just acting.

- Ni as HA: Se IJs are more confident in their own ability to think of the consequences before acting than Se EPs, but whenever they do it "too much", they get anxious and wonder whether they should not just do something before it gets "too late".

- Ni as 7th: Ne EPs can easily focus on one specific scenario or on possible sequences and consequences but find it less stimulating than Ne.

- Ni as 8th: Ne IJs can equally do it, but it's not something they see as too important. For instance, since they are not likely to act on Se impulses, do they have to worry too much about consequences?

Quote:

---

- Ni as creative: this is more visible in the "sequential thought" and "future scenarios" aspect, since it is "at the service" of Te and Fe. With Te - is this going to work in the longer term? With Fe - what will be their emotional response in the longer term?

---

Not a very accurate ending. I daydream a lot, but when I'm with other people, I keep thinking what other people's emotional response IS (in the present). I also sometimes try to figure out how others will react in the future, but I mostly just keep thinking of my personal interpretation of the present and past. I act first and analyze later. I think this is the majority of my daydreams. I sometimes think of a hypothetical future situation that I like and I think about everyone else around me and what attitude they have towards me and I make a "to do" list to get there. But it's not quite the same as thinking of their emotional response in the long term. Besides, other people's opinions of me are important mostly only because this information serves as proof of who I am. They are not important for what they are. I don't go around pleasing people and other Fe dominants don't do that either.

Ni creative with Fe - who have I become in the longer term?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kristiina

Ni creative with Fe - who have I become in the longer term?

---

Which is also defined by:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kristiina

Besides, other people's opinions of me are important mostly only because this information serves as proof of who I am.

---

Which is what I had in mind with "emotional responses in the longer term" - ie what their opinions are of you. I don't disagree with what you said.

I daydream about, uhm, sex.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FDG

I daydream about, uhm, sex.

---

Do you go about your day with a permanent hard-on, or something?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KSpin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FDG

I daydream about, uhm, sex.

---

Do you go about your day with a permanent hard-on, or something?

---

No because I don't daydream all day

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FDG

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KSpin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FDG

I daydream about, uhm, sex.

---

Do you go about your day with a permanent hard-on, or something?

---

No because I don't daydream all day

---

That's not entirely my point. Is it just cool in Italy to talk about wanting sex all day or something? I certainly know it wouldn't be practical to do so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KSpin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FDG

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KSpin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FDG

I daydream about, uhm, sex.

---

Do you go about your day with a permanent hard-on, or something?

---

No because I don't daydream all day

---

That's not entirely my point. Is it just cool in Italy to talk about wanting sex all day or something? I certainly know it would be practical to do so.

---

Depends on the company of course, I don't talk about sex with my boss at work (only sometimes), or with my family members

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Expat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kristiina

Ni creative with Fe - who have I become in the longer term?

---

Which is also defined by:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kristiina

Besides, other people's opinions of me are important mostly only because this information serves as proof of who I am.

---

Which is what I had in mind with "emotional responses in the longer term" - ie what their opinions are of you. I don't disagree with what you said.

---

Rephrasing it makes a world of difference. It's not the same thing from my PoV.

Of course I meant wouldn't, rather than would.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kristiina

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Expat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kristiina

Ni creative with Fe - who have I become in the longer term?

---

Which is also defined by:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kristiina

Besides, other people's opinions of me are important mostly only because this information serves as proof of who I am.

---

Which is what I had in mind with "emotional responses in the longer term" - ie what their opinions are of you. I don't disagree with what you said.

---

Rephrasing it makes a world of difference. It's not the same thing from my PoV.

---

What's the difference according to your PoV?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Expat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kristiina

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Expat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kristiina

Ni creative with Fe - who have I become in the longer term?

---

Which is also defined by:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kristiina

Besides, other people's opinions of me are important mostly only because this information serves as proof of who I am.

---

Which is what I had in mind with "emotional responses in the longer term" - ie what their opinions are of you. I don't disagree with what you said.

---

Rephrasing it makes a world of difference. It's not the same thing from my PoV.

---

What's the difference according to your PoV?

---

It's the emphasis.
1. The person constantly takes note of what others think of him. When someone thinks bad, then the person has failed. They will try twice as good to be liked by others. (his own personality changing is a side-effect of trying to be liked by others)
2. The person wants to be a better person. He tries really hard to be nice and likable and honorable, etc. When he becomes impolite and annoying, he has failed. (looking for positive reactions from others is just necessary to find out when he has become an annoying person.)

I think that's why ENFjs need ISTjs - I need reliable input of who I have become. I still keep thinking of childhood mistakes to judge who I am now. That's because I don't have enough input on my current personality and I have no idea who I am. When I feel good about my personality, I am unbothered by people who don't like my personality traits. The problem starts when they make me think that I have misjudged my personality. So it is false to say that ENFjs aspire to be liked, which is the same as confirming the common misconception that ENFjs don't know who they are because they keep changing themselves to be liked by others. When I think that most people dislike me I do change my behavior, but it is because of myself not others.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kristiina

So it is false to say that ENFjs aspire to be liked, which is the same as confirming the common misconception that ENFjs don't know who they are because they keep changing themselves to be liked by others. When I think that most people dislike me I do change my behavior, but it is because of myself not others.

---

Well, personally I never said or meant that ENFjs necessarily aspire to be liked; actually even to aspire to be disliked is consistent with what I said.

I understand what you said, it makes sense and it is pretty much what I was thinking (even if badly phrased).