.
Printable View
.
:Ni: - Meaning; Processes words, symbols, situations, appearances i.e. objects that indicate relationships between phenomena, in both spatial and temporal context.
:Ni: paired with :Te: gives these indications a partly explicit nature, an emphasis on breadth is resulted from such a combination. Indications are procured from lucid, straightforward and unequivocal behavioral observations that are algorithmic, processual and data-heavy.
:Ni: paired with :Fe: gives these indications a completely implicit nature, an emphasis on depth is resulted from such a combination. Indications are procured from underlying interpretative and speciously tumultuous behavioral observations that are capricious, impressionable and phantasmagorical in nature.
LIE utilizes a reduced, yet concentrated, understanding of :Ni:-indications to work within the larger picture of algorithmic operations, in terms of developing a process or maintaining integrity to an objective standard, such as implemented plans, or some activity that is to be carried out; administrative control of data flow and behavior through a sharpened lens of meaningful and inter-related phenomena.
ILI utilizes a reduced, yet concentrated, understanding of :Te:-operations to work within the larger picture of fluctuating phenomena and elusive implications, in terms of investigating further to reveal underlying implications for the sake of understanding or application(also explicating such information for others); investigative apprehension of inter-related phenomena through a sharpened lens of operative, convenient and relevant processual organization.
- Will finish later.
Can't make Ni your scapegoat for blatant indolence.Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeSeeCold
Or is it Ni that you're blaming? ;)
From the vague, largely unhelpful generalities department:
-A personal, subjective sense of the flow of time. "Days passing like grains of sand through the fingers," "Time screeching to a halt," that sort of thing.
-A tendency towards imagination, fantasy, escapism, et cetera, and finding the life one "leaves behind" to be rather uninspiring upon "return." Desires for novelty are answered with retreats into escapist entertainment rather than actually going out and finding said novelty.
-A constant, Memento Mori sense of time pressure: one's time is always running out and one has only so much time to "do something" worthy of validating one's existence.
-In regards to the above, a large focus on one's existential "merit." "Am I worth the time and love and resources that have been put into me?" and other such troubling questions.
-In regards to the above, a lot of time spent "finding oneself" through philosophy, pseudoscientific personality theories, and a hell of a lot of introspection. Generally remains inconclusive and frustrating. I may perhaps be mixing e4 issues here, though.
-This is more Si-Role, I think, but a lack of motivation at the thought of riches, comfort, and expensive status symbols and a tendency to boggle at those who put so much importance on such things. Contradictarily, a tendency to spend excessive amounts of money on various interests, despite the almost complete lack of interest in gaining money for money's sake.
-In regards to money, a sincere desire to do what is most personally rewarding and existentially satisfying. "Finding one's place," essentially.
-A tendency to generalize local happenings to the broader world. Finding one's wallet stolen may lead one to make great and dark assumptions about the people of the world like, "When you get down to it, you can't trust anyone." Having someone return a dropped wallet with no items therein missing prompt one to make great and happy assumptions like, "When you get down to it, everyone is basically good."
-While this may just be personal taste, a tendency to enjoy largely melody-driven music with as few distractions in the way as possible. Lyrics are one such distraction.
I don't really feel like typing any more. But, well, this is how I subjectively interpret Nigh.
Ni is God's function.
If you know God, you know Ni.
And once enough people have posted to provide LIISeeCold with ideas he'll chime in with his parrotastic response.
Haha.Quote:
Originally Posted by k0rpsey
Ni to me is a thirst for abstract perceptive organization which guides powerfully controlled actions.
Walk into a subway, any subway, find the restroom, walk into it, go to the nearest toilet, lift up the lid.... chances are good that you'll find Ni contained within
NUH UH! YOU ARE!Quote:
Originally Posted by HaveLucidDreamz
Your comment lacks something I find, see I tend to look at my comment as a journey, its a journey into the depths of the earth to discover the true origins of this concept of Ni. You partake on this concept as a sort of lofty abstract notion floating overhead but with only a vague notion of what it means in reality.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Knight
Well it is rather simple, you see the truth can be found but one must follow my direction, the answer you seek is found in stall #32 at the new york subway station terminal 4. There open the lid and discover the contents which will enlighten you.
The truth exists, it is waiting there.......
See its like the matrix, your mental liberation is at hand......
It's not my fault you fail to grasp this simple and basic principleQuote:
Originally Posted by Ashton
I want to be interesting though, this greatly disturbs me, how can I be interesting, how I can I satisfy this request? Please let me know, your depleting my self-esteem reserves! at this rate I'll run out by tomorrow!!!!!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashton
http://pictureposter.audiworld.com/91331/oh_noes.jpg
http://thedcam.com/wp-content/upload...passed-out.jpg
You don't know me man..........
Seriousness: Most people already have their minds set, all discussion will do is bring about drama and childish ego stroking/battles... if people really want to discuss something intellectual with me they should seize the opportunity when it exists, instead of try to force a debate etc. I mean some debates just go no where productive unfortunately. So I'm not really interested in a serious intellectual discussion for the time being.
Yea maybe I'll get around to it, I think in terms of serious discussion I'm fairly consistent with your view, I like the concept of Ni being stochastic, but I'll get around to the detailed version later.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashton
it's largely the same thing as Se's preconception and stereotype based way of thinking, except it doesn't strive for the comprehensive understanding of the thing at hand but suffices with it's phenomenal, perspective-dependent form.
the absence of preconceptions explains the difference almost completely. Ne/Si function usage is neither limited by these preconceptions nor capable of using them to it's advantage in order to pre-empt experiential dynamics. Si/Ne always ends up deducing the identity of the world from the experience, while Ni/Se can occasionally deduce the other way around by limiting the number of world states considered plausible (almost entirely based on whether they have been encountered before). however, Si/Ne can recognize a concrete progression on the phenomenal plane (recognizing a recurrent set of concrete experiences one is "used to").Quote:
What's Ne/Si in contrast?
Se/Ni: anchored by sense of normalcy
Ne/Si: anchored by sense of familiarity
all of this applies within the model that all types use all functions at differing levels of frequency and intensity.
^accurate.
I see Ni as a reflector of forms, which once emptied of their observable content, reveal inherent boundaries that can be cross-referenced; this then gives rise to abstract realms taken as the basis of phenomena (Ti influence here makes it sound more a priori than it is; paired with Fi it seems to act as more of a mediator of inherent form). Its being dynamic is why the given combination of forms always implies something self-referential. Strange attractors are a good illustration of how it operates.
Let's see who all posted, their frequency and meaningful & relevant content.
So we have 7 users who responded to the original post, at least once. 2 users who felt that they had to spam. One of which who contributes to almost no Socionics discussion, except for feigning mastery and expertise through cowardice in the form of hiding in trenches waiting for the brave and purposeful soldiers to attempt to mount the trench to shoot of their weapons on top of no man's land to win the war(, cause somebody has to die for our causes, right?) to pick them off with an advantage only true handicaps should be handicapped with.
I.e. if you posted in this thread without speaking your piece, while at the same time critiquing others, consider yourself a slimy coward worthy of no medal. Get out of our war. I'm ashamed to have you in my squad. I'd shoot you myself, except for the fact that I'd have to waste a bullet on you that I could use for a more purposeful operation.
Thanks for your dramatic overcompensation. It's hilarious as usual. I weighed in on Ni in other threads, Tuff Stuff. Feel free to use the search function.Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeSeeCold
Stop that! Role-playing is literally painful for me to read because my empathy chip picks up the inevitable fail-wave and I momentary can't tell if it came from me or someone else. :indifferent:Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeSeeCold
Also staying on-topic is way overrated. If we are not free to go on tangents we will be on the narrow road to serious-town; nooooooo fun.
delete
By saying "Everything is possible" you are saying something very anti-Ni.
Anything could be possible, but what's probable?Quote:
Originally Posted by Director Trevor
Good job, thieving parrot.Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeSeeCold
Quote:
Originally Posted by k0rpsey
Haha..touché. :).Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeSeeCold
Well, I mean, technically anything is, indeed, possible. It's possible a duck could just teleport into my room right this second and quack out Wagner's "Flight of the Valkyries" before teleporting out, but the chances of that happening are, like, one in a googolplex.Quote:
Originally Posted by Director Trevor
No, you see, I was replying to the "Ha-ha, Gotcha!" spirit of your comment with a more basic, less disguised version of my own.Quote:
Originally Posted by HaveLucidDreamz
I like the word "vision" for :Ni:, also the word "foresight" (I'm going concise over all-encompassing here) :)
http://i.imgur.com/rryApl.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by k0rpsey
3/9/11 is before 3/14/11.
Touché.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Knight
It says nothing about Ni. Try again.Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeSeeCold
:thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by k0rpsey
Keep lying, Fauntleroy. It solidifies your case and makes you an icon of admiration.Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeSeeCold
What is this? A fight over who said it first? That's waste of time..and quite despicable one, for that matter.
It's my type. You can't be it.
You need to edit that to include yourself for a number of useless posts.Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeSeeCold
Also I don't really have any great insights, I think of Ni in terms of two basic principles... the first is
subjective vs objective intuition
i.e. introverted and extroverted brands of intuition
the second principle is
bodies/fields.... dynamics/statics
Ni to me is very stochastic; its dynamic and concerned with fields, while being subjective.
I think it tends to see things in terms of relationships, it says nothing about objects. It's like a field theory. Say an electromagnetic field (probably lost 90% of my audience there), but anyways, an electric field doesn't tell you anything about the actual motion or effect on a particle in that field... it just tells you about the relationship of things with respect to a single source, that source being what causes the electric fields. However a field theory doesn't talk much about the source, its merely understood that the fields are created by the source.
In a sense Ni is much like this as are all "fields", I think of fields like this....
http://www.math.uic.edu/~math210/new...ges/lab7-3.gif
it represents circular motion (this particular diagram not Ni), but the key thing to realize about the field, is that it doesn't tell you what an object will do, its not a diagram of an object or an animation of its motion, its a relationship between something in the field and the source which generates the field. Say it tells you a charged particle will interact with a source charge in such a way that the charged particle will end up undergoing circular motion.
Ni however is not a static field but a dynamic one, so the focus isn't purely on the relationships between things but on the shifts in these relationships, like wave fluctuations, fault lines, and heat dissapation (now I lost the remaining 10% of my audience).... anyways its like this
http://www.tecplot.com/Portals/0/ima...ation_wake.gif
A shifting field, the nature of the relationship between something and a source changes.
This is the underpinning for the spatio-temporal nature of Ni.
Ni of course is relatively useless without a consideration of a source or object to relate to or from, which is why in the ego block it will be coupled with Te or Fe, which is a bodies function which helps solidify the actual thing of consideration.
Also important to notice here is the fact Ni is less contextual as Ne as Ni is a field function and Ne is a body function. Ne will couple with a static field, which is more fixed. Therefore Ne requires a dynamic subconscious, which provides the shifts in cognition, this dynamic subconscious is the source of the contextual perspective.
In Ni types their subconscious is fixed (static) and therefore remains focused on a constant set of principles or notions from which they attempt to discern how this fixed viewpoint interacts dynamically with the world around them.
It's interesting to note how this breaksdown in terms of temperament
Ixxj and Exxp ==> Dynamic Subconscious, Static Conscious
Ixxp and Exxj ==> Dynamic Conscious, Static Subconscious
The energy and movement of these temperaments makes sense
Exxj and Exxp are more reactionary
Ixxj and Ixxp are more subdued
Exxj is reactionary to dynamic changes, imposing a set motive -- Strategic Reaction
Exxp is reactionary to basic triggers, without a specific motive -- Improvisational Reaction
Ixxj is very controlled attempting to impose a fixed system on their external reality, but they build these fixed things to react to the dynamics of the outer world
Ixxp is more drifty and floaty, like a leave on a breeze or misty, its temporal and readily shifts, but it has a tendancy to coaless around something static.
Basically visions, mental imagery, imagination, looking to the past and future.
Ni dominant types appear to be "dreamers", and "in their heads," because they don't focus on the here-and-now. Instead they are focused on their idealistic visions of how things can be. Basically, its the opposite of Se, where Se is focused on acting in the here-and-now. This may cause others to see them as lazy and unreliable in certain practical affairs. But this is also why Ni and Se complement each other so well- Ni lights the way, and Se gets it done.
And I want to reinforce that all types use Ni, but you can see that it's more dominating in types such as the INFp and INTp. The difference with them is they predominantly use Ni as a lens of reality, and types such as ESTjs, who predominantly use Te as a lens of reality, scoff at the use of seeing life through Ni, deeming Ni-types as too impractical and in their heads. So yes, I just described Ni as imagination even though all types use imagination.
We don't have to settle for the ambiguous use of the word "imagination" which also is attributed to Ne.Quote:
Originally Posted by guy123
Consider the process that Ni's "imagination" goes through. First there is sensing - a static snapshot of reality is captured. That snapshot is held on to and abstracted with other snapshots. As time goes on, however, these old snapshots are used over and over and over in the formulation of new thought without being refreshed. With use, the snapshots' quality and intensity degrade, and so are overcompensated for in the form of Ni, or "imaginative thought" of how things really are. But in actuality, the degradation in quality and intensity makes Ni's overcompensation highly susceptible to being irrational and unrealistic, mystic and crazy even. All of this, though, can be reverted by feeding Ni with more snapshots of current sensational reality. However, that does not mean Se is on the actual side of "reality". In all truth, the subjective Self that allows these thoughts to deviate from the sensations, can attest to there being more to reality than meets the eye. But I digress.
It's interesting to see how this plays out in the types.
Ni Ego: Freely abstracting snapshots, accentuation is not too unhealthy, unless extreme.
Ni SuperId: Accepting of abstractions. Susceptibility to unrealistic thought from the unconscious.
Ni SuperEgo: Unconscious influence due to suppression. Constant suppression of abstractions for fear of unhealthy imaginative thought. Overcompensation in the form of "getting lost in the present" and minutiae.
Ni Id: Unconscious influence due to suppression, highly susceptible to unrealistic imaginative thought due to a reluctance to refresh Se perceptions.
All of the above should be taken with the understanding that from Se, Ni not only works both in a progressively nonlinear fashion, but also works outside the movement of time, for example, creative mental imagery and sound which are distortions of perceptions.
That's a very common sense description of how strength/weakness of functions work but it doesn't quite describe the difference between value/unvalue. For example an ENTp is strong in Ni as much as a INTp in general, however the ENTp prefers Ne to Ni to supplement their logic. The ENTp also prefers Ti to Te.Quote:
Originally Posted by guy123
I think the idea is that ENTp are strong in Ni as well, but they prefer Ne as a cognitive outlook. I would argue that since Ni is part of the unconscious according to Model A or subconscious, that The ENTp is more dynamic subconsciously and the static consciously. That this concept of dynamic/static works on the conscious/unconscious.
Surely this is the way all human beings must function in order to survive. From "I've seen that animal before, he is a wild beast and is likely to try to eat me" in the jungle to "Oh I see where this is likely going, I have seen these signs before but they are more likely attempts to wine, dine, and ultimately just have sex with me, well that is not a path I like and I may avoid it now or more likely wait for more information to confirm or contradict" in dating or even "Oh I see the way these changes are happening, they lead to X result, well that may not be what we want to do so maybe we should alter actions A and B" in almost any area of life.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashton
I find it very odd to think that those who do not have Ni in their ego blocks operate much differently. If they did, and supposing :Ni:less people lacked this ability, XSEs would have a very hard time of it indeed.
Well if this thread doesn't make you want to gouge your eyes out you deserve a pat on the back. Socionics iz too hard.
Congratulations, you've managed to capture the essence of Ne.Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeSeeCold
Ne is static, object (otherwise known as "bodies"), abstract. Conceptualization such as described in the above paragraph.
Ni abstracts over context rather than content. And if you can bring yourself to use the world "snapshot", you aren't talking of it, so don't try to twist it around and claim that's what you're saying.
FFT.Quote:
Ne Ego: Freely abstracting snapshots, accentuation is not too unhealthy, unless extreme.
Ne SuperId: Accepting of abstractions. Susceptibility to unrealistic thought from the unconscious.
Ne SuperEgo: Unconscious influence due to suppression. Constant suppression of abstractions for fear of unhealthy imaginative thought. Overcompensation in the form of "getting lost in the present" and minutiae.
Ne Id: Unconscious influence due to suppression, highly susceptible to unrealistic imaginative thought due to a reluctance to refresh perceptions.
Seriously. Especially the first. If that's how you describe yourself, know you don't fit in with Ni-egos, but with Ne-egos. And no, we aren't going to rename those and rearrange everything just to accommodate you, sorry.
Stop parroting me.Quote:
Originally Posted by k0rpsey
Let me help you with a clarification for new users: Bohr is ILE in Socionics, this type was close to be renamed "Niels Bohr" from "Don Quixote" in the late eighties, there is evidence in Aushra's letters; Ashton uses his own esoteric system (TM).Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashton
Hey, don't say that, it would mean we agree on something! :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by Aiss
I'm probably not quite conveying clearly what I mean.Quote:
Originally Posted by ClaudiaM
Yes, everybody makes these sorts of inductive inferences based upon their synthesized knowledge + life experience. Obviously this ability is vital to human survival, else our prehistoric forebears would've been eaten by predators and generally driven to extinction by selective pressures. This basic psychological faculty isn't what I'm referring to.
asdl;asjk;ljasfk;lasfdkjl;adsl;'k'
… Alright, look—where everybody gets perpetually tripped up on Socionics, is they keep trying to draw 1-1 simplifications between particular IEs and particular ontological facets of reality—i.e., that each IE uniquely corresponds to certain fundamental properties present in the natural objective world, properties that would retain a tangible existence even independent of human awareness to apprehend them. As if in principle one could measure the "Se" inherent in a rock, or something ridiculous like this.
It doesn't work like this. The influence of IEs and Socionics type begins and ends at the phenomenal level of the human psyche, only modulating the subjective style in how an individual experiences reality—IEs have absolutely no direct determinative control over what can be perceived, nor what actions people can or cannot undertake, nor what sorts of cognitive operations their minds can engage in, etc. Any influence IEs might have on these more operational aspects of human mental function would be of a marginally indirect nature, exhibiting a diverse range of idiosyncratic effects between individuals per differences in gender, heredity, culture, background, and other co-factors.
Naturally of course, it makes sense that the phenomenological variations induced by IE differences have intersubjective consequences in the realm of human relations, social dynamics, various ideas and constructs emergent from such arrangements, etc. Hence quadras and intertypes.
I'll get back to adequately defining :Ni: later. For now, you're welcome to read as much or as little of the following as you'd like from Andrzej Kokoszka's primer on Kepinski Information Metabolism:
Information Metabolism
The model of information metabolism was first presented by Kępiński (1970) and then further developed by him and others. Kępiński claimed that technical models impose a dualistic characterization of human beings—thus implying that mental processes govern somatic processes mechanistically and explaining very little about psychological life, e.g., experiences, creativity. He considered biological models to be closer to psychological reality than technical ones, because they take life into consideration.
–He also describes two phases of such metabolism. The first phase, which is almost entirely involuntary and localized in lower parts of the brain (diencephalon and rhinencephalon), establishes a basic attitude “toward” or “against” some aspects of the environment. The second phase, which is voluntary and localized in the neocortex, is responsible for active behavior in relation to the environment.
Information metabolism occurs within a defined space and time. It has a control center (CC)—i.e., ego or the “I”—and functional structures enabling reception, processing, and assimilation of information, as well as regulation of the organisms‘s own activities. Information metabolism is determined by the phylogenetic and ontogenetic past of organism, but it is also involved in pursuing aims which extend into the future. It creates individually varying pictures (i.e., functional structures) of the outside world, which although objectively uniform are perceived as unique and different by each individual.
The term “functional structure” is used by Kępiński for schematic representation of perception and activity.
System of Values
Decision-making is recognized as one of the basic features of life; it has different degrees of freedom in different organisms—limited in the most primitive organisms and a maximum value in humans. The hierarchy of values governs the mechanisms selecting and filtering the information reaching any particular decision-making level. This system of values has three levels (Kępiński, 1977b):
- The first one is biological and is concerned with all that is described by the concept of biological programming (i.e., all that man is born with and can control to some extent). It is determined by two basic biological laws: self and species preservation. Depending on how well they are established one can speak of greater or lesser life dynamics of an individual.
- The second level determines an emotional attitude (i.e.,“towards” or “against”). It is characterized by the formation of complexes, which are emotional centers where an individual’s emotional relations meet with the environment. These centers are usually formed around an important person from childhood and influence a person’s emotional relationships in later life. Complexes can also arise in connection with traumatic situations and can shape an individual’s attitudes toward similar situations that occur later in life. Complexes become fixed by repetition. The biological and emotional levels are located below the threshold of consciousness, meaning they are automatic. They shape a “real hierarchy of values” (“I am really like this”) based on fixed and automatic tendencies, habits, and attitudes.
- The third level is sociocultural and determines how an individual projects himself into the future (“I would like to be like this, these are my goals, this seems most important to me”). This level is conscious and consists of an individual’s aspirations, ideals, and cultural models. It refers to the hierarchy of values of one’s social environment.
The real hierarchy of values is more important in the process of decision-making, but final decisions are determined by all levels of the system of values, including the ideal hierarchy. Therefore, an individual’s will can control his or her behavior to a certain degree.
Sense of Reality and Feedback between an Organism and Environment
One of the rules governing information metabolism says that the world around is changeable and the organism is stable (Kępiński, 1979a). Any change in the structure of the exchange of signals with the environment provokes an orientation reflex, which is accompanied by the feeling of anxiety. The force of the vegetative and emotional reaction to the outside stimulus depends on the force and the unusualness of the stimulus and on the present state of consciousness. The reaction is exceptionally strong when the signaling system is in a state of low selecting ability (e.g., in sleep), which can be shown as a scale of values changing with the situation and making one set of signals reach the organism more easily than another.
Maintaining Order
“Order is the essence of the structure. The preservation of structure and order in the metabolism of energy requires no effort, at least no conscious effort, for this is taken care of by physiological mechanisms. Their preservation in information metabolism is connected with continuous efforts focusing on the proper selection of information coming from the outside and inside of the organism and on the choice of proper forms of reactions. This integrational effort is largely unconscious. However, the part that reaches our consciousness is enough to realize how much effort it requires to keep order in the chaos of contradictory emotions, ideas, plans and ways of looking at the world and ourselves, etc. Integrational efforts are conscious when they take shape in an act of will. Information metabolism is subjectively experienced as a pressure of sensation coming from the world outside, which man tries to arrange and sort out under greater or lesser tension and due to which the world of man’s experiences constantly changes its theme and color” (Kępiński, 1979a, p. 191), and from the world inside, which is made up of signals coming from the interoreceptors and man’s own mental activities: dreams, plans, memories, fantasies, thoughts, and the like.
The degree of total integration of the functions of man’s nervous system is proportional to the state of consciousness, e.g., aware responsiveness to the environment. Any break of contact with the surrounding world causes a relaxation of this integrating process. The sense of reality is directly dependent on man’s sensorial contact with the environment. In man’s sense of reality there is a lot of habit and belief. Its order is disturbed whenever man faces a new, unusual situation, when he experiences an accumulation of too many positive or negative emotions, or when, for a longer period of time, his actions are influenced by his negative emotional attitude toward the world around him and to himself. The monotony of such an emotional state makes life dull, unpleasant, and boring so that its reality becomes blurred.
Way to make a hasty assumption. The snapshots I was referring to are :Se:. Read it again, and this time pay attention.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aiss
I know you're calling it Se. Doesn't make it so. You were talking about abstracting snapshots, which is Ne.Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeSeeCold
I recall an old thread which you might or might not have seen, where elements were similarly represented. If that's where you get it from, try to read it with comprehension. Otherwise, if those are your own thoughts, I can only say you sound totally Ne > Ni.
The snapshots are :Se: , Ni abstracts them and makes them into dynamic mental representations of reality.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aiss
Abstract has more than one meaning:
Quote:
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/abstract#English
Verb
abstract (third-person singular simple present abstracts, present participle abstracting, simple past and past participle abstracted)
(transitive) To separate; to remove; to take away. [quotations ▼]
(transitive) To withdraw.
(transitive) (euphemistic) To steal; to take away; to remove without permission. [quotations ▼]
(transitive) (art) To create artistic abstractions of.
(transitive) To summarize; to abridge; to epitomize.
(transitive) To consider abstractly; to contemplate separately or by itself.
(transitive) To draw off (interest or attention).
He was wholly abstracted by other objects.
[quotations ▼]
(transitive) (obsolete) To extract by means of distillation.
(intransitive) To withdraw oneself; to retire.
(intransitive) (rare) To perform the process of abstraction. [quotations ▼]
(intransitive) (computing) To produce an abstraction, usually by refactoring existing code. Generally used with "out".
Now, are you going to say Ni is "concreted"?
Ne, Ni, Te and Ti are all abstract. Try again. Hint: focusing exclusively on "snapshot" and exclusively on "abstract" didn't work so far. How about no longer avoiding the point?Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeSeeCold
What are you talking about avoiding the point?Quote:
Originally Posted by Aiss
The "abstract" I was using in terms of Ni and Se, is a conceptualization. Se is the sensate reality, just as much as Si, however the former is static and the latter is dynamic. Both Ne and Ni are conceptualizations, both are abstracted forms of sensing. Where the difference is - is in Ni feeding off multiple snapshots to recreate a dynamic reality. Whereas Ne is the snapshot, and that's that.
You're playing around with different terms and definitions and here I am trying to find consensus and you're monkeying around bringing other perspectives in that are irrelevant to what we're trying to straighten out. We're not discussing Ti and Te. We're discussing Ni, Se, Ne, and Si. Stick to the topic.
Parroted definitions deserve an A.Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeSeeCold
It isn't. It's abstracted snapshot, if anything. I just find it hard to see how you could keep missing this.Quote:
Where the difference is - is in Ni feeding off multiple snapshots to recreate a dynamic reality. Whereas Ne is the snapshot, and that's that.
Then stop pretending I'm denying Ni is abstract or whatever else you put into my mouth.Quote:
You're playing around with different terms and definitions and here I am trying to find consensus and you're monkeying around bringing other perspectives in that are irrelevant to what we're trying to straighten out. We're not discussing Ti and Te. We're discussing Ni, Se, Ne, and Si. Stick to the topic.
I'm not so much bringing "other" perspectives here, as I'm trying to create a relevant abstracted perspective, in human terms - put it into context. Of course, if you choose to see it as multiple perspective leading to conceptualized content, you may - that's called Si/Ne, by the way. And choosing to see something a specific way is precisely what information metabolism is about, not "using" elements or logical thinking or mysticism or whatever other stereotyped crap is flying around.
An unsubstantiated claim.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aiss
I didn't deny that:Quote:
It isn't. It's abstracted snapshot, if anything. I just find it hard to see how you could keep missing this.
Where the difference is - is in Ni feeding off multiple snapshots to recreate a dynamic reality. Whereas Ne is the snapshot, and that's that.
I didn't drop the word "abstract" because that was not the focus of the moment. There was no need to as both Ne and Ni are abstract in the same sense of being intuitive.
Bringing in Ti and Te is bringing in other perspectives, as we were not discussing those.Quote:
Then stop pretending I'm denying Ni is abstract or whatever else you put into my mouth.
I'm not so much bringing "other" perspectives here, as I'm trying to create a relevant abstracted perspective, in human terms - put it into context.
FTR, IM aspects are an absolute, but IM elements are not.Quote:
Of course, if you choose to see it as multiple perspective leading to conceptualized content, you may - that's called Si/Ne, by the way. And choosing to see something a specific way is precisely what information metabolism is about, not "using" elements or logical thinking or mysticism or whatever other stereotyped crap is flying around.
Not to mention:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Starfall
Ns discussing their own function = fail :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by jessica129
This takes socionics to a whole new level of nerdy.
:lol:
I still like "vision" and "foresight" for :Ni: the most - brevity rules :)
Yep yep :yup: language is a damn tricky thing, it would be so much better if there were a way to directly pipeline raw thoughts from brain to brain (and perhaps there will be one day)...Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashton
Expansive and detailed definitions are wonderful to have - when things are boiled down to be more mentally portable, they can also be a lot more crude (and different from person to person), which is a problem (and :lol: for "Stupetronics")...
And yep, I'll be busting my brains out on Kepinski Information Metabolism - if I'm reading things right, I can already see the :Se:/:Ni: axis in place with the second phase of information metabolism greatly consisting of :Se:, if I'm reading (and wording) this correct...
Fix'd. Though you can leave any notions of baiting here. I've spoken my piece, and need only to finish my initial entry.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashton
ESC that really sounds like Ne. Lol
Okay. I'm going to do with without referencing anything I've said before about the topic and before reading any of the other replies, from a sort of experiential viewpoint.
Ni is getting to the end through the beginning. Ni is guessing accurately. Ni is seeing the elements at play and thereby divining the outcome. Ni is figuring out the point of the sentence and the punchline of the joke before either have arrived. Ni is that little guess of "oh, I see what you're doing there. It's under the surface but I get it." This is referencing something I like to say a lot, but Ni is kind of like a fire-pole you can climb up or slide down at will, moving backwards and forwards in causality (causality, perhaps both in the sense of material and of final cause, is a better descriptor of what Ni moves in than "time"). Ni is how I get a hold of slippery thoughts while writing poetry. Ni is pattern-recognition, particularly in human behavior (NiFe). Ni is generally concerned with metacognitive data. Ni is the part of me enthralled by storytelling, because a story represents a pattern not yet unfurled or something. Or it is like deeply satisfying insofar as it enacts a pattern?
I connect Ni somehow to this large spiritual sense, this sense of energy, this awareness of spirit, the tendency towards pathetic fallacy, towards reading things into or out of the wind, of finding convergence points between matter and spirit and the ways of the mind and the physical laws of the earth. Ni is the "don't wreck the shroud" of how things wrap around one another perfectly, how everything represents itself. Ni is my interest in representation as another one of those chains on which I can slide forward or backward ("representative priority" perhaps. Or the places in which two things that mimic one another bounce off each other, the features they attract from one another, etc). Ni is the perspective that makes me look for chains on which to move forward and backwards. Ni is my desire for something big and huge and grand and overwhelming, my preference for sublimity. Ni is the Aleph, the Alpha and Omega sign, the image of the image of the world, the thing that will smack me in the face and overwhelm my soul, or at least the desire for that sort of knowledge (although not the cultural conditioning and personal history that make me color it as knowledge. And even here, it is more accurately "knowing").
Ni is the tendency to be outside myself. Ni is all of these things, and my failure to come to a coherent cohesion of them all. Ni is my desire to wade into the incoherent, and my celebration thereof because of my reading of the clearness that must result.
You know it's funny because I'm certain I know just as much if not more about Socionics than all the people that have posted in this thread, yet I still can't even begin to attempt reading some of this abstract gibberish
It's ok, you'll get there one day, I know how it is. Sometimes when I go running I'm certain when I start I could run for miles, but then I find that throughout the process it's a lot harder than I originally thought it would be.Quote:
Originally Posted by ScarlettLux
Just keep trying, its ok, you'll get there...
Ni is intuition (knowing/sensing) of time. My mom: "honey, save your money, this is hard time and be prepared just in case you lose your job"; she attempts to see the process of job/money/preparation as one sequence of time and she serves this as a means to advise her dual, who is impulsive, at the moment type of person, to do the important things now that will help them in the future. She knows the time and is confident about the control of events within it. Just do as she says and you'll be ahead of the game. That's her take on it.
My LSE boyfriend, Ni PoLR, feels like he has no control of time and gets stressed out because they are naturally controlling types. Next to death, another element that LSE has no control over, time is second. You should only see him and how tense he is when we have to be at the movies by 7pm. We try to get out and be there 2 hours ahead (it's usually 30 minutes away in real time), but in LSE time it's anything but 30 minutes away. He is terrible with time.
I'm great with time. I have Ni demo and so I calm him down. He, being external type, needed to see that I was great with it to trust me. I showed him and now he's so relaxed around me.
lol maybe you're just fatQuote:
Originally Posted by HaveLucidDreamz
Ashtons first post was the best so far. Read the damn type descriptions on wikisocion. An IEI sees repetitive patterns that have occured before to predict or extrapolate what will happen and then try to change or avoid outcomes as to benefit. Time based patterns, trends. If you acted like an asshole before and did X and I see X again I will catch onto your drift and move away from your bullshit or call you out etc. It's simple as shit. My basic perception is seeing the flowing trends of things. People act in learned patterns and algorithms and repeat the shit out of them. I use Fe by calling out your shit, talking shit, influencing others, making a distraction with Fe, telling a joke to lighten the situation if your going to blow up etc. Next time I won't say "shit" so much. But I don't have a static goal, just Ni as the way.
Yeah... thats not what Ni is. at all. Ni has nothing to do with time has far as the actual definition or description goes, rather the function applies well to time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritsa33
I would say that Ni acts all of those ways when it is a leading function. The only part I would not agree with you on is the third function you listed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vois
"Ni is in terms of the effect the world has on them and the influence they have upon the world." It is a subjective function so this makes sense about the subjective nature of this Intuition.
"Ni seeks self-awareness and thinks that experiences are fleeting." This is important for Se types, who seek experiences.
"Ni seeks a path to inner space where the mind is isolated from the world, a place of clarity. Security for Ni is having inner peace from where the complexities and confusions of life have little impact. Ni must withdraw in order to cope or discover." Shows off more of their introverted, low energy, nature.
"Ni will step back to address a problem because they need perspective, which would likely be fresh having forgotten a lot of what was done in the past; however, they would remember where they stood on such issues." This is the perceptual nature of Ni. The problem solving part is also a contribution to their experience seeking, high an impulsive energy driven duals. One has to slow down or be slow to look at the problem in a perspective only that Ni may not look at the problem in many perspectives? This I am not sure about.
Yeah... Im not sure. It might be type related, I do similar things to what you described but I doubt it's related to Ni.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vois
Lol if we were to stick with the analogy yes, in a way I am fat, I'm pregnant with much knowledge on the topic of socionics.Quote:
Originally Posted by ScarlettLux
The extended version was much better. Metaphors, +1.Quote:
Originally Posted by HaveLucidDreamz